Re: [net-next PATCH v5 02/10] octeontx2-pf: RVU representor driver

[Markus Elfring]

> This patch adds basic driver for the RVU representor.
…

Please improve such a change description with imperative wordings.
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.10-rc3#n94

Can an adjusted summary phrase become also a bit more helpful?
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.10-rc3/source/Documentation/process/maintainer-tip.rst#L124


…
> +static int rvu_get_rep_cnt(struct otx2_nic *priv)
> +{
…
> +	mutex_lock(&priv->mbox.lock);
> +	req = otx2_mbox_alloc_msg_get_rep_cnt(&priv->mbox);
…
> +exit:
> +	mutex_unlock(&priv->mbox.lock);
> +	return err;
> +}
…

Would you become interested to apply a statement like “guard(mutex)(&priv->mbox.lock);”?
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.10-rc3/source/include/linux/mutex.h#L196


…
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/rep.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
…
> +#ifndef REP_H
> +#define REP_H
…

Can unique include guards be more desirable also for this software?

Regards,
Markus