From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>
To: Jianhao Xu <jianhao.xu@seu.edu.cn>, Zilin Guan <zilin@seu.edu.cn>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@lunn.ch>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>,
Loic Poulain <loic.poulain@oss.qualcomm.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
Sergey Ryazanov <ryazanov.s.a@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: wwan: iosm: Fix memory leak in ipc_mux_deinit()
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2025 10:42:22 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a79bed83-8a43-4ed8-94d4-542b7285835e@web.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251230092532.1145752-1-zilin@seu.edu.cn>
>> …
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/wwan/iosm/iosm_ipc_mux.c
>>> @@ -456,6 +456,7 @@ void ipc_mux_deinit(struct iosm_mux *ipc_mux)
>>> struct sk_buff_head *free_list;
>>> union mux_msg mux_msg;
>>> struct sk_buff *skb;
>>> + int i;
>> …
>>
>> May this variable be defined in the loop header instead?
…
> Thanks for the suggestion.
>
> I would prefer to keep the declaration at the top of the block
Do you tend to interpret such information still as the beginning
of the function implementation?
> to maintain
> consistency with the existing coding style of this function and to keep
> the patch focused strictly on the fix.
Would the mentioned variable be relevant only for an additional if branch?
Regards,
Markus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-12-30 9:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-12-30 7:18 Zilin Guan
2025-12-30 8:31 ` Loic Poulain
2025-12-30 9:15 ` Markus Elfring
2025-12-30 9:25 ` Zilin Guan
2025-12-30 9:42 ` Markus Elfring [this message]
2025-12-30 11:04 ` Zilin Guan
2026-01-04 19:12 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=a79bed83-8a43-4ed8-94d4-542b7285835e@web.de \
--to=markus.elfring@web.de \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=jianhao.xu@seu.edu.cn \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=loic.poulain@oss.qualcomm.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=ryazanov.s.a@gmail.com \
--cc=zilin@seu.edu.cn \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®