On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 2:29 AM Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 10:27:36AM -0700, Yosry Ahmed wrote: > > > > Nit: keep the cleanup_* naming for labels to make it obvious and to be > > consistent with the rest of the file (e.g. cleanup_free, > > cleanup_memcg, cleanup_file/cleanup_all). See > > test_memcg_subtree_control(). > > > > I would honestly have one label to cleanup the memcg. Calling > > cg_destroy() on a non-existent memcg should be fine. rmdir() will just > > fail silently. All other tests do this and it's easier to read when we > > have fewer return paths. My advice would be cleanup_file and > > cleanup_memcg labels. > > One error label handling is very bug prone. You always end up freeing > things which have not been initialized/allocated. Or dereferencing > pointers which are NULL. Or, since most kernel functions clean up > after themselves, you end up double freeing things. I am not suggesting a single cleanup label, I said "one label to cleanup the memcg", which is separate from cleaning up the file. Basically just merging the destroy_memcg and free_memcg labels to be consistent with other tests. I don't feel strongly about this anyway :) > > regards, > dan carpenter
