Re: net/sonic: Fix some resource leaks in error handling paths

[Markus Elfring]

> If you can't determine when the bug was introduced,

I might be able to determine also this information.


> how can you criticise a patch for the lack of a Fixes tag?

I dared to point two details out for the discussed patch.


>> To which commit would you like to refer to for the proposed adjustment
>> of the function âmac_sonic_platform_probeâ?
>
> That was my question to you. We seem to be talking past each other.

We come along different views for this patch review.
Who is going to add a possible reference for this issue?


>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst?id=e99332e7b4cda6e60f5b5916cf9943a79dbef902#n460
>
> My preference is unimportant here.

It is also relevant here because you added the tag âReviewed-byâ.
https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/comment/1433193/
https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/5/8/1827


> I presume that you mean to assert that Christophe's patch
> breaches the style guide.

I propose to take such a possibility into account.


> However, 'sonic_probe1' is the name of a function.

The discussed source file does not contain such an identifier.
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.7-rc5/source/drivers/net/ethernet/natsemi/macsonic.c#L486
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/net/ethernet/natsemi/macsonic.c?id=2ef96a5bb12be62ef75b5828c0aab838ebb29cb8#n486


> This is not some sequence of GW-BASIC labels referred to in the style guide.

I recommend to read the current section â7) Centralized exiting of functionsâ
once more.


>> Can programming preferences evolve into the direction of âsay what the
>> goto doesâ?
>
> I could agree that macsonic.c has no function resembling "probe1",
> and that portion of the patch could be improved.

I find this feedback interesting.


> Was that the opinion you were trying to express by way of rhetorical
> questions? I can't tell.

Some known factors triggered my suggestion to consider the use of
the label âfree_dmaâ.


> Is it possible for a reviewer to effectively criticise C by use of
> English, when his C ability surpasses his English ability?

We come along possibly usual communication challenges.

Regards,
Markus