Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v2 0/7 iwl-next] idpf: refactor virtchnl messages

[Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@intel.com>]

From: Brady, Alan <alan.brady@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2024 16:12:06 +0100

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Lobakin, Aleksander <aleksander.lobakin@intel.com>
>> Sent: Monday, January 29, 2024 5:24 AM
>> To: Brady, Alan <alan.brady@intel.com>
>> Cc: intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org; netdev@vger.kernel.org;
>> willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com; Bagnucki, Igor
>> <igor.bagnucki@intel.com>; Kitszel, Przemyslaw
>> <przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v2 0/7 iwl-next] idpf: refactor virtchnl
>> messages
>>
>> From: Alan Brady <alan.brady@intel.com>
>> Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2024 21:47:40 -0800
>>
>>> The motivation for this series has two primary goals. We want to
>>> enable support of multiple simultaneous messages and make the channel
>>> more robust. The way it works right now, the driver can only send and
>>> receive a single message at a time and if something goes really wrong,
>>> it can lead to data corruption and strange bugs.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> There are a fistful of functions in this series and IDPF's virtchnl code in general
>> that allocate a memory chunk via kzalloc() family and then free it at the end of
>> the function, i.e. the lifetime of those buffers are the lifetime of the function.
>> Since recently, we have auto-variables in the kernel, so that the pieces I
>> described could be converted to:
>>
>> 	struct x *ptr __free(kfree) = NULL;
>>
>> 	ptr = kzalloc(sizeof(*x), GPF_KERNEL);
>>
>> 	// some code
>>
>> 	return 0; // kfree() is not needed anymore
>>
>> err:
>> 	return err; // here as well
>>
>> That would allow to simplify the code and reduce its size.
>> I'd like you to convert such functions to use auto-variables.
> 
> Certainly, should be straightforward and make the code much better, sounds good to me. Just to clarify I'm only going to mess with the virtchnl functions I've otherwise altered in this patch series to maintain appropriate scope, yes?

Yes, only virtchnl functions. New functions that you introduce 100%, the
rest only if you touch them.

> 
> -Alan
> 
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Olek

Thanks,
Olek