From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD8533C9EEF; Thu, 11 Jun 2026 11:20:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1781176849; cv=none; b=u4sb4EF1mLAHU4eNu0AeAWswRGc36XcnJIaaBzIkOxKavWPlTDYX3sOqdQLejhxXhILDs3g/0aAOKpyoCELy0NfhZsPjD8VuKXdEc91bAY5EiTNnKvAQ0ZgQWna0cOBzUn792NthZY6O+SLm6cTbMJ9Ca58i7Kfk3ww2M5XRfvQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1781176849; c=relaxed/simple; bh=OFh1/b1LnIhEhCvfR3RACSxZDLRFac2VAuOc7+DAECk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=FQkevCOsFroox2XPGN+5iVhwNG8YgsJsbrBJcQwE+8vWz0TteGRhKeu1zVdfdVaQ3FFhDQ758Zq7/uznKo7wWX7brYZMLrM5LxEEStXfiSCTHOuD6woRXEmIlsa1WQlT/lz1qAz/6fDWWlOIqIzZ9bZpE759vjJHnK0e6LQykBU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=arm.com header.i=@arm.com header.b=MHNKcILq; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=arm.com header.i=@arm.com header.b="MHNKcILq" Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEB2E1E2F; Thu, 11 Jun 2026 04:20:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pluto (usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com [172.31.20.19]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D9E013F99C; Thu, 11 Jun 2026 04:20:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=arm.com; s=foss; t=1781176846; bh=OFh1/b1LnIhEhCvfR3RACSxZDLRFac2VAuOc7+DAECk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=MHNKcILqIFkwUeM49WMED3f412FnavaaFcuc6S4n/B3nBaxYKbfPjGfPdFeFd3vY9 tzKsWYTHy1CE/C5YGoqWO3ZcCYqK0wEkjpd9MrmgnygBJ50Zmc8W7EZG0snbe0Zbfb 88u1V3NDF8+B+sxd4Gv0DQ0+WQ33JRE7IckMj7S4= Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2026 12:20:33 +0100 From: Cristian Marussi To: Markus Elfring Cc: arm-scmi@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Cristian Marussi , Sudeep Holla , LKML , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: Use common error handling code in __scmi_device_create() Message-ID: References: <545ffb86-55f5-46b2-83ca-285cd8d540d7@web.de> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <545ffb86-55f5-46b2-83ca-285cd8d540d7@web.de> On Thu, Jun 11, 2026 at 10:34:52AM +0200, Markus Elfring wrote: > From: Markus Elfring > Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2026 10:27:45 +0200 > > Use an additional label so that a bit of exception handling can be better > reused at the end of an if branch. > Hi, > This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software. > > Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring > --- > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/bus.c | 7 +++---- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/bus.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/bus.c > index 793be9eabaed..8c20ed1a8243 100644 > --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/bus.c > +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/bus.c > @@ -450,14 +450,13 @@ __scmi_device_create(struct device_node *np, struct device *parent, > return NULL; > > scmi_dev->name = kstrdup_const(name ?: "unknown", GFP_KERNEL); > - if (!scmi_dev->name) { > - kfree(scmi_dev); > - return NULL; > - } > + if (!scmi_dev->name) > + goto free_scmi_dev; > > id = ida_alloc_min(&scmi_bus_id, 1, GFP_KERNEL); > if (id < 0) { > kfree_const(scmi_dev->name); > +free_scmi_dev: > kfree(scmi_dev); I can understand the aim, but jumping in the middle of another block just to reuse the cleanup statement is far less readable (and ugly) Cleanup handlers probably a better solution here...but I have NOT looked at all the sorrounding code here recently...so I maybe wrong and keeping the current code could be even bette. Thanks, Cristian