> Use scope based of_node_put() cleanup to simplify code. I see opportunities to improve affected function implementations another bit. … > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/starfive/pinctrl-starfive-jh7100.c … > @@ -543,18 +540,18 @@ static int starfive_dt_node_to_map(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev, > pins = devm_kcalloc(dev, npins, sizeof(*pins), GFP_KERNEL); > if (!pins) { > ret = -ENOMEM; > - goto put_child; > + goto free_map; > } > > pinmux = devm_kcalloc(dev, npins, sizeof(*pinmux), GFP_KERNEL); > if (!pinmux) { > ret = -ENOMEM; > - goto put_child; > + goto free_map; > } … > @@ -623,8 +620,6 @@ static int starfive_dt_node_to_map(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev, > mutex_unlock(&sfp->mutex); > return 0; > > -put_child: > - of_node_put(child); > free_map: > pinctrl_utils_free_map(pctldev, map, nmaps); > mutex_unlock(&sfp->mutex); … > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/starfive/pinctrl-starfive-jh7110.c … > @@ -175,18 +175,18 @@ static int jh7110_dt_node_to_map(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev, > pins = devm_kcalloc(dev, npins, sizeof(*pins), GFP_KERNEL); > if (!pins) { > ret = -ENOMEM; > - goto put_child; > + goto free_map; > } > > pinmux = devm_kcalloc(dev, npins, sizeof(*pinmux), GFP_KERNEL); > if (!pinmux) { > ret = -ENOMEM; > - goto put_child; > + goto free_map; > } … > @@ -233,8 +233,6 @@ static int jh7110_dt_node_to_map(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev, > *num_maps = nmaps; > return 0; > > -put_child: > - of_node_put(child); > free_map: > pinctrl_utils_free_map(pctldev, map, nmaps); > mutex_unlock(&sfp->mutex); 1. Exception handling is repeated a few times also according to memory allocation failures. How do you think about to use a corresponding label like “e_nomem” so that another bit of duplicate source code can be avoided? https://wiki.sei.cmu.edu/confluence/display/c/MEM12-C.+Consider+using+a+goto+chain+when+leaving+a+function+on+error+when+using+and+releasing+resources 2. Will development interests grow for the usage of a statement like “guard(mutex)(&sfp->mutex);”? Regards, Markus