On Sun, 10 May 2020, Markus Elfring wrote:
> Christophe Jaillet proposed to complete the exception handling also for this
> function implementation.
> I find that such a software correction is qualified for this tag.
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?id=e99332e7b4cda6e60f5b5916cf9943a79dbef902#n183
>
> Corresponding consequences can vary then according to the change
> management of involved developers.
>
Makes sense.
> > I think 'undo_probe1' is both descriptive and consistent with commit
> > 10e3cc180e64 ("net/sonic: Fix a resource leak in an error handling
> > path in 'jazz_sonic_probe()'").
>
> I can agree to this view (in principle).
>
> By the way:
> The referenced commit contains the tag “Fixes”.
> https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1231354/
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200427061803.53857-1-christophe.jail...@wanadoo.fr/
>
Right, I'd forgotten that. Do you know when these bugs were introduced?
> > Your suggestion, 'free_dma' is also good.
>
> Thanks for your positive feedback.
>
>
> > But coming up with good alternatives is easy.
>
> But the change acceptance can occasionally become harder.
>
The path to patch acceptance often takes surprising turns.
>
> > If every good alternative would be considered there would be no
> > obvious way to get a patch merged.
>
> I imagine that some alternatives can result in preferable solutions,
> can't they?
Naming goto labels is just painting another bikeshed. Yes, some
alternatives are preferable but it takes too long to identify them and
finding consensus is unlikely anyway, as it's a matter of taste.
