> Patches that changes open coded things to common helpers or things like > kmalloc_array where appropriate or things that make the code more robust > are fine and welcome, but I am not going to take this as it just shuffles > things around.
Thanks for such information. > It does not fix anything and it does not improve the code, I have got an other expectation for the shown implementation detail. > but it certainly carries the risk of breaking something This is usual in software development, isn't it? > (yes in this case it looks perfectly fine, though). Thanks for this bit of positive feedback. > Due to the locking requirements we cannot do such a simplification here. I find this detail strange. Would you like to check run time consequences for the shown error code settings once more? Regards, Markus
