On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 1:42 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt
[off-list ref] wrote:

On Thu, 2018-05-31 at 00:31 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

quoted

On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 12:07 AM, Eddie James
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

I'll comment the series later, though you have to address previous
comments first:
- understand devm_ purpose and how it works

I think it is perfectly understood and I don't see what your problem
here is. So please be a proper civil human being an express your
concern precisely rather than with aggressive comments.

I apologize for this kind of tone, let's assume it was a bad day.

Now to clarify that specific point, devm purpose is to automatically
clean up the resources used by the device when it is torn down.

However, in this specific case, it makes sense to dispose of the port
structure explicitly because this is a failure in registering an
individual port which doesn't lead to a failure of the entire driver.

Thus not freeing it means the structure would remain allocated
uselessly until the whole driver is torn down.

Yep, so, why do we care? If it holds few hundreds of bytes, can't we
live with it?
If no, the devm_k*alloc() is a wrong choice in the first place.

quoted

- discuss with maintainer a design of enumerating ports

I've been at that game for at least a good 2 decades. Maintainers
generally do *not* discuss design until a patch is proposed. I even
still try every now and then, maintainers are like lawyers, they don't
want to tell you what to do in case they still want to reject it after
seeing it later :-) I know I've been one of them for long enough.

If you have specific issues with how this is done, please express them
clearly. It's quite possible that there's some better way to do what
Eddie is doing here, but without *construtive* feedback this is
pointless.

It feels like you duplicate approach which is done in OF generic case.
That is my concern. Though, if Wolfram is telling that is OK, I have
no objections.

I'm disappointed here because we have an example of somebody rather new
producing what is overall pretty damn good code,

That is true. His code much better than many I have seen before.

despite a few corner
issues, and being (again) treated like crap.

Sorry for that, life is harsh.

This isn't the right way to operate, and I believe this has been made
clear many times before.

Yes.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko