Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-27699-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2024 11:33:08 -0700
From: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>
Cc: Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
 kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: vfio/platform: Use common error handling code in
 vfio_set_trigger()
Message-ID: <20240116113308.78935e11.alex.williamson@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <ab6bcd8b-f53c-47d1-8c55-c374a36d6ee4@web.de>
References: <f1977c1c-1c55-4194-9f72-f77120b2e4e5@web.de>
	<20240115133756.674ae019.alex.williamson@redhat.com>
	<ab6bcd8b-f53c-47d1-8c55-c374a36d6ee4@web.de>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 12:32:23 +0100
Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de> wrote:

> > TBH, this doesn't seem like a worthwhile exit point consolidation.  A
> > change like this might be justified if there were some common unlock
> > code that could be shared, but for a simple free and return errno by
> > jumping to a different exception block, rather than even a common exit
> > block, I don't see the value.  
> 
> Can it be helpful to store the shown kfree() call only once
> in this function implementation?

I don't believe it's worthwhile, it's a simple function with simple
exit paths and consolidating those exit paths for a trivial kfree() is
unnecessarily complex.  Thanks,

Alex