[PATCH v3 03/12] cpufreq: intel_pstate: Use scope-based cleanup helper

Zihuan Zhang zhangzihuan at kylinos.cn
Wed Sep 3 10:51:06 AEST 2025


在 2025/9/2 19:47, Rafael J. Wysocki 写道:
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2025 at 12:33 PM Zihuan Zhang <zhangzihuan at kylinos.cn> wrote:
>>
>> 在 2025/9/1 23:17, Rafael J. Wysocki 写道:
>>> On Mon, Sep 1, 2025 at 10:58 AM Zihuan Zhang <zhangzihuan at kylinos.cn> wrote:
>>>> Replace the manual cpufreq_cpu_put() with __free(put_cpufreq_policy)
>>>> annotation for policy references. This reduces the risk of reference
>>>> counting mistakes and aligns the code with the latest kernel style.
>>>>
>>>> No functional change intended.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Zihuan Zhang <zhangzihuan at kylinos.cn>
>>>> ---
>>>>    drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c | 8 +++-----
>>>>    1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
>>>> index f366d35c5840..4abc1ef2d2b0 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/intel_pstate.c
>>>> @@ -1502,9 +1502,8 @@ static void __intel_pstate_update_max_freq(struct cpufreq_policy *policy,
>>>>
>>>>    static bool intel_pstate_update_max_freq(struct cpudata *cpudata)
>>>>    {
>>>> -       struct cpufreq_policy *policy __free(put_cpufreq_policy);
>>>> +       struct cpufreq_policy *policy __free(put_cpufreq_policy) = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpudata->cpu);
>>>>
>>>> -       policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpudata->cpu);
>>>>           if (!policy)
>>>>                   return false;
>>> The structure of the code is intentional here and there's no reason to
>>> change it.
>>
>> Got it. Thanks for clarifying.
>>
>> So for this case the current structure is intentional -
> Note that I'm talking about this particular change only.  The other
> change in the $subject patch is fine.
>
>> should I also avoid similar changes in other drivers?
> That depends on who maintains them, which is why I wanted you to split
> the patch into smaller changes in the first place.
>
> My personal view is that code formatting changes, which effectively is
> what this particular one is, are pointless unless they make the code
> much easier to follow.


UnderStood, Thanks!



More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list