On Thu, Jan 05, 2023 at 07:27:00AM +0100, Christophe JAILLET wrote: > Le 05/01/2023 à 05:54, Jakub Kicinski a écrit : > > On Wed, 4 Jan 2023 22:05:33 +0100 Christophe JAILLET wrote: > > > devm_alloc_etherdev() and devm_register_netdev() can be used to simplify > > > code. > > > > > > Now the error handling path of the probe and the remove function are > > > useless and can be removed completely. > > > > Right, but this is very likely a dead driver. Why invest in refactoring? > > > > Hi Jakub, > > this driver was just randomly picked as an example. > > My main point is in the cover letter. I look for feed-back to know if > patches like that are welcomed. Only the first, Only the second, Both or > None. > > > I put it here, slightly rephrased: > > > These patches (at least 1 and 2) can be seen as an RFC for net MAINTAINERS, > to see if there is any interest in: > - axing useless netif_napi_del() calls, when free_netdev() is called just > after. (patch 1) > - simplifying code with axing the error handling path of the probe and the > remove function in favor of using devm_ functions (patch 2) I would say no. In many occasions, the devm_* calls were marked as harmful. Latest talk about devm_kzalloc(): https://lpc.events/event/16/contributions/1227/ Thanks > > or > > if it doesn't worth it and would only waste MAINTAINERS' time to review what > is in fact only code clean-ups. > > > The rational for patch 1 is based on Jakub's comment [1]. > free_netdev() already cleans up NAPIs (see [2]). > > CJ > > [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20221221174043.1191996a@xxxxxxxxxx/ > [2]: https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.2-rc1/source/net/core/dev.c#L10710
