Hi Zihuan,
On 8/27/25 09:55, Zihuan Zhang wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 在 2025/8/27 16:30, Ben Horgan 写道:
>> Hi Zihuan,
>>
>> On 8/27/25 03:31, Zihuan Zhang 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 <zhangzih...@kylinos.cn>
>>> ---
>>> arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c | 9 +++------
>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c
>>> index 5d07ee85bdae..e3cb6d54f35b 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/topology.c
>>> @@ -307,17 +307,16 @@ int arch_freq_get_on_cpu(int cpu)
>>> */
>>> if (!housekeeping_cpu(cpu, HK_TYPE_TICK) ||
>>> time_is_before_jiffies(last_update +
>>> msecs_to_jiffies(AMU_SAMPLE_EXP_MS))) {
>>> - struct cpufreq_policy *policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu);
>>> + struct cpufreq_policy *policy __free(put_cpufreq_policy);
>> Based on the guidance, in include/linux/cleanup.h, I would expect the
>> assignment to be done on this line.
>>
>> "...the recommendation is to always define and assign variables in one
>> * statement and not group variable definitions at the top of the
>> * function when __free() is used."
>
>
> The reason I split the assignment into multiple lines is because
> scripts/checkpatch.pl gave a warning about the line being too long.
>
> But if you think a single-line assignment is better, I will modify it
> accordingly.
My preference, for what it's worth, would be to keep it one statement
and split the line after the =.
>
>>> int ref_cpu;
>>> + policy = cpufreq_cpu_get(cpu);
>>> if (!policy)
>>> return -EINVAL;
>>> if (!cpumask_intersects(policy->related_cpus,
>>> - housekeeping_cpumask(HK_TYPE_TICK))) {
>>> - cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
>>> + housekeeping_cpumask(HK_TYPE_TICK)))
>>> return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>>> - }
>>> for_each_cpu_wrap(ref_cpu, policy->cpus, cpu + 1) {
>>> if (ref_cpu == start_cpu) {
>>> @@ -329,8 +328,6 @@ int arch_freq_get_on_cpu(int cpu)
>>> break;
>>> }
>>> - cpufreq_cpu_put(policy);
>>> -
>>> if (ref_cpu >= nr_cpu_ids)
>>> /* No alternative to pull info from */
>>> return -EAGAIN;
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Ben
>>
Thanks,
Ben
