On Sun, 10 May 2020, Markus Elfring wrote: > Christophe Jaillet proposed to complete the exception handling also for this > function implementation. > I find that such a software correction is qualified for this tag. > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?id=e99332e7b4cda6e60f5b5916cf9943a79dbef902#n183 > > Corresponding consequences can vary then according to the change > management of involved developers. > Makes sense. > > I think 'undo_probe1' is both descriptive and consistent with commit > > 10e3cc180e64 ("net/sonic: Fix a resource leak in an error handling > > path in 'jazz_sonic_probe()'"). > > I can agree to this view (in principle). > > By the way: > The referenced commit contains the tag “Fixes”. > https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1231354/ > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200427061803.53857-1-christophe.jaillet@xxxxxxxxxx/ > Right, I'd forgotten that. Do you know when these bugs were introduced? > > Your suggestion, 'free_dma' is also good. > > Thanks for your positive feedback. > > > > But coming up with good alternatives is easy. > > But the change acceptance can occasionally become harder. > The path to patch acceptance often takes surprising turns. > > > If every good alternative would be considered there would be no > > obvious way to get a patch merged. > > I imagine that some alternatives can result in preferable solutions, > can't they? Naming goto labels is just painting another bikeshed. Yes, some alternatives are preferable but it takes too long to identify them and finding consensus is unlikely anyway, as it's a matter of taste.
