Re: [PATCH v6 3/9] x86/resctrl: Parse ACPI ERDT table and save CACD cpumask for RMDD domains

["Chen, Yu C" <yu.c.chen@intel.com>]

On 8/24/2026 11:54 PM, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> Hi Chenyu,
> 

[ ... ]

> 
> Yes, code readability is a priority. It is not all just about code readability. Please consider
> all the points I mentioned above. I do not see any justification for get_rdt_resources()
> leaving dangling state on failure. This is something that will get tripped over in the next
> inevitable refactor. Apart from that, adding a single "cleanup" function at one location down in
> the call stack is convenient for *this* implementation based on the *current* state of the code but
> while doing so it breaks custom, not just of resctrl but of the rest of the kernel also, and because
> of that makes this code difficult to build on and maintain.
> 
	goto out;
> 
> Above is the issue I mentioned earlier where get_rdt_resources() leaves dangling state.
> If it cleaned up after itself on failure as is the custom in the kernel then
> resctrl_arch_late_init() does not have to.
> 
> If the goal is to avoid goto in __resctrl_arch_late_init() then the failure paths that
> follow get_rdt_resources() can just call erdt_exit() directly to make obvious where what
> needs to be cleaned up.
> 
> As the suggestion is implemented the cleanup is inconsistent with __resctrl_arch_late_init()
> doing its own cleanup for code run _after_ erdt_init() and leaving the erdt_init() cleanup
> to be done further down the stack by __resctrl_arch_late_init()'s caller. While technically
> correct this inconsistency adds unnecessary complexity and another place that will get tripped
> over in the next inevitable refactor.
> 

I see. This is very helpful guidance. I'll adjust the code accordingly.

thanks,
Chenyu