Re: Buggy __free(kfree) usage pattern already in tree

[Linus Torvalds]

On Fri, 15 Sept 2023 at 13:04, Bartosz Golaszewski
<bartosz.golaszewski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> One more question wrt the __free() coding style.

I don't think we really have much of a coding style yet.

We currently literally have _one_ use of that __free() thing, and it
was problematic.

Which is why I'd like to start off fairly strict, but I'm not sure we
should make it a "coding style" yet.

IOW, my current thinking is "let's always have the constructor and
destructor together", and see how it ends up going.

Not because I think it's necessarily any kind of final rule, but
because I think our whole cleanup thing is new enough that I think
we're better off being a bit inflexible, and having a syntax where a
simple "grep" ends up showing pretty much exactly what is going on wrt
the pairing.

                  Linus