On Fri, Oct 11 2024 at 20:48, Markus Elfring wrote:
>> rzg2l_irqc_common_init calls of_find_device_by_node, but the
>> corresponding put_device call is missing.
>
> How do you think about to append parentheses to function names
> (so that they can be distinguished a bit easier from other identifiers)?
>
>
>> Make use of the cleanup interfaces from cleanup.h to call into
>> __free_put_device (which in turn calls into put_device) when
>
> Can it help to influence the understanding of this programming
> interface by mentioning the usage of a special attribute?
Can you please stop pestering people with incomprehensible word salad?
>> leaving function rzg2l_irqc_common_init and variable "dev" goes
>> out of scope.
>>
>> Mind that we don't want to "put" "dev" when rzg2l_irqc_common_init
>> completes successfully, therefore assign NULL to "dev" to prevent
>> __free_put_device from calling into put_device within the successful
>> path.
>
> Will further software design options become applicable here?
>
> Can any pointer type be used for the return value
> (instead of the data type “int”)?
How is this relevant here?
>
>> "make coccicheck" will still complain about missing put_device calls,
>> but those are false positives now.
>
> Would you like to discuss any adjustment possibilities for this
> development tool?
Would you like to get useful work done insteead of telling everyone what
to do? There is nothing to discuss.
>> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-renesas-rzg2l.c
>> @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
>> */
>>
>> #include <linux/bitfield.h>
>> +#include <linux/cleanup.h>
> …
>
> This header file would usually be included by an other inclusion statement already,
> wouldn't it?
Relying on indirect includes is not necessarily a good idea/
>> @@ -530,12 +531,12 @@ static int rzg2l_irqc_parse_interrupts(struct rzg2l_irqc_priv *priv,
>> static int rzg2l_irqc_common_init(struct device_node *node, struct device_node *parent,
>> const struct irq_chip *irq_chip)
>> {
>> + struct platform_device *pdev = of_find_device_by_node(node);
>> + struct device *dev __free(put_device) = pdev ? &pdev->dev : NULL;
>> struct irq_domain *irq_domain, *parent_domain;
>> - struct platform_device *pdev;
>> struct reset_control *resetn;
>> int ret;
>>
>> - pdev = of_find_device_by_node(node);
>> if (!pdev)
>> return -ENODEV;
> …
>
> Would you dare to reduce the scopes for any local variables here?
> https://refactoring.com/catalog/reduceScopeOfVariable.html
Can you keep your refactoring links for yourself please? We are aware of
this.
But this change fixes a bug and that's it. We are not doing cleanups in
a bug fix. Please read and understand Documentation/process before
giving people ill defined advise.
Thanks,
tglx
