From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8C0F431B80B; Mon, 17 Nov 2025 08:30:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1763368253; cv=none; b=aQTwmTbB8RU79qMkMWor4srdXNUQ3Y4XTMedCWTmCQq9YILM/pZa+zGV+mtOfdBrL9Jp/8T09QTwMuUqQ/8WavAtNwxxNvInH0T8EHBlHbrZ4/+nvrVcXqS/6KpyIfyEOZtt73cGnY0SXa+BUpltMoQgWsguugctroSaRLrTglY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1763368253; c=relaxed/simple; bh=oyL4RAoPT5WjmfkBp++tzsd9cGfRBNBXVhXMABZr4Gg=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=qtT7FjLg+4YLdhwd7DRIz8NsUP29nSRMPc2bulATLetNQBRzoZ4fyG0wO5vIuPcIn2dRZjnHYFYgewragzZCE+8d6T4MFdtas9yYAQ9lyyJq8APdRMSqOYqv3cS8i1v6s0zmSRJDrO0iXQXosi2FhxyUFtx1J3gMpmPqx2yPeMQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=bodu7qOZ; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=2R0/8c2r; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="bodu7qOZ"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="2R0/8c2r" From: Nam Cao DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1763368250; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=C0Qd/B33hV7RKE+tJ507nEcVJgjRk1dxw3Zlm/uPsKo=; b=bodu7qOZVKpkp/HEsQIeWTOAQhsu4Ngwe2/STj0krjHw3OUu5iDQcvt0MKD9Qyvo7Ppk7y aXqmejtwOufRqkhq1s4GXV178gd9hLAVdhl2SKdx/2sEPNr9MrP7nO0rDoyDMHZBQv8t8j soldRxpJq/yerIrarGBw4LoIlwMiGoaIZMz4w/OhFeUszooJFxatLFHpurp8pfAnOR4XRT pnkStD/tHXaj9fFqkA67z+IafbMxlxM3YM0Hof27ts3xiRjJ5yzdGaLjcIGxKBCgJX0ROs 78+WdJVYQTBdniC41TNQL2OZ9ZG9eEezXI0Sg9hsjQJyayWR/Ud+HI53BJuC1w== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1763368250; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=C0Qd/B33hV7RKE+tJ507nEcVJgjRk1dxw3Zlm/uPsKo=; b=2R0/8c2rvJaiqW4zpyQkHEUdmQF+GdPR1f7IyEzXrkkTO7QeNOAinrrhukU3mNFL6sqqA9 MOHbb4a428RRl3Dg== To: Gabriele Monaco , Steven Rostedt Cc: Masami Hiramatsu , Mathieu Desnoyers , linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] rv: Convert to use __free In-Reply-To: References: <6b2a618815b45ac4ac09976ef4fb0bd3635c143d.1763306824.git.namcao@linutronix.de> Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2025 09:30:48 +0100 Message-ID: <87wm3pgix3.fsf@yellow.woof> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Gabriele Monaco writes: > On Sun, 2025-11-16 at 15:35 +0000, Nam Cao wrote: >> - reacting = rv_create_file("reacting_on", RV_MODE_WRITE, root_dir, >> NULL, &reacting_on_fops); >> - if (!reacting) >> - goto rm_available; >> + struct dentry *reacting = >> + rv_create_file("reacting_on", RV_MODE_WRITE, root_dir, NULL, >> &reacting_on_fops); > > Nothing is removing "reacting_on" in case of successive failure, is it? > Am I missing anything or couldn't we just set both variables to __free() ? We can. I overlooked this one :( Nam