> What do you think about changing: > "But when nfp_nsp_has_hwinfo_lookup fail, the pointer is not released,.." > to … > or > "But when nfp_nsp_has_hwinfo_lookup fail,
I became curious about a related wording variant. But when a call of the function “…” failed, > NSP resource is not cleaned up and unlocked." I find such information also nicer. (The abbreviation “NSP” might need another bit of clarification.) I imagine there might be interests (eventually related to computer science) to measure the corresponding object sizes because of a missed function call and offer a more precise information in the commit message (depending on the willingness to invest efforts in such a data determination). Will such considerations become relevant for any subsequent software development approaches? Regards, Markus
