Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/syncobj: Use scope-based cleanup for eventfd_ctx

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] Mixing goto-based error handling with scope-based cleanup (__free) in the same function.
--

commit 991d574653fb7465f62bf99703d5af0d6fe21920
Author: Bence Csokas <bence.csokas@arm.com>

drm/syncobj: Use scope-based cleanup for eventfd_ctx

This patch modifies drm_syncobj_eventfd_ioctl() to use the scope-based
cleanup helper for eventfd_ctx, removing the explicit put calls.

> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
> index c23a5de27effa..261d5606e8bd8 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c
> @@ -1462,9 +1462,9 @@ int
>  drm_syncobj_eventfd_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
>  			  struct drm_file *file_private)
>  {
> +	struct eventfd_ctx *ev_fd_ctx __free(eventfd) = NULL;
>  	struct drm_syncobj_eventfd *args = data;
>  	struct drm_syncobj *syncobj;

[ ... ]

> @@ -1502,8 +1503,6 @@ drm_syncobj_eventfd_ioctl(struct drm_device *dev, void *data,
>  
>  	return 0;
>  
> -err_kzalloc:
> -	eventfd_ctx_put(ev_fd_ctx);
>  err_fdget:
>  	drm_syncobj_put(syncobj);
>  	return ret;

[Severity: Medium]
Does this code in drivers/gpu/drm/drm_syncobj.c:drm_syncobj_eventfd_ioctl()
mix goto-based error handling and scope-based cleanup in the same function?

The cleanup subsystem documentation in include/linux/cleanup.h states that for
a given routine, all resources that need a "goto" cleanup should be converted
to scope-based cleanup, or none of them should be. Mixing the two creates
confusing ownership semantics.

Could the syncobj cleanup also be converted to use __free(), or should we
stick to goto-based cleanup for both resources in this function?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260909-efd-autofree-v1-0-c6c3c19cc702@arm.com?part=2