Re: [PATCH 12/21] pinctrl: k210: Use scope based of_node_put() cleanups

[Damien Le Moal]

On 5/1/24 21:56, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote:
> From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx>
> 
> Use scope based of_node_put() cleanup to simplify code.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-k210.c | 7 ++-----
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-k210.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-k210.c
> index b6d1ed9ec9a3..2753e14c3e38 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-k210.c
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-k210.c
> @@ -849,7 +849,6 @@ static int k210_pinctrl_dt_node_to_map(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev,
>  				       unsigned int *num_maps)
>  {
>  	unsigned int reserved_maps;
> -	struct device_node *np;
>  	int ret;
>  
>  	reserved_maps = 0;
> @@ -861,13 +860,11 @@ static int k210_pinctrl_dt_node_to_map(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev,
>  	if (ret < 0)
>  		goto err;
>  
> -	for_each_available_child_of_node(np_config, np) {
> +	for_each_available_child_of_node_scoped(np_config, np) {
>  		ret = k210_pinctrl_dt_subnode_to_map(pctldev, np, map,
>  						     &reserved_maps, num_maps);
> -		if (ret < 0) {
> -			of_node_put(np);

Personally, I am really not a fan of things that hide code like that scoped
thing... If I want a language that hides code, I would be doing C++ :)
That said, I am not opposed to this so I will let Linus (Walleij) decide.

Also, I think that "for_each_available_child_of_node" is a bad name... It really
should be something like for_each_available_child_of_node_get() to make it clear
that a of_node_put() is needed.

> +		if (ret < 0)
>  			goto err;
> -		}
>  	}
>  	return 0;
>  
> 

-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research