On Thu, Jun 08, 2023 at 07:25:27PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, Jun 8, 2023 at 1:06 PM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > struct obj *p __free(kfree) = kmalloc(...); > > Yeah, the above actually looks really good to me - I like the naming > here, and the use looks very logical to me. > > Of course, maybe once I see the patches that use this I go "uhh", but > at least for now I think you've hit on a rather legible syntax. > > I'm still a bit unsure of the "no_free_ptr(p)" naming, but at least > it's pretty clear about what it does. > > So my only worry is that it's not pretty and to the point like your > "__free(kfree)" syntax. > > But it feels workable and not misleading, so unless somebody can come > up with a better name, I think it's ok. #define return_ptr(p) \ return no_free_ptr(p) struct obj *p __free(kfree) = kmalloc(...); if (!p) return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM); ... return_ptr(p); ?
