From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from szxga04-in.huawei.com (szxga04-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.190]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 97BC522C6EB for ; Sat, 7 Dec 2024 02:54:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.190 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1733540094; cv=none; b=itEzvqieEmpJ5AivGhsw2CcwSQaE1cB0j3qmW1lB0wHIzeWvSXBauNyDLWuDWxJezNlNdNHbwIDRFAei8ZsruB0UDW7lpnRSjRzvubXSYvIuFjYi8XOw+5f5KcQUZo0wHDdHbpXmW8/StsyY7UC54BU096hRxK5C/0RQCBK+pm4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1733540094; c=relaxed/simple; bh=lRpNvy3F6D+u8dxPzbrBWrX6F/f8Kk5CDUEneiVefgI=; h=Subject:To:CC:References:From:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=StGgF0meg/db4k+KTZOBxueLXqhprlj36SxMER9BPUCYrVcpBBXHWXC5yC7dE+BeqeWOvh0xf+oR0g/VgzJtkt2GaDOyTe3rMxJAVYqqqnbu0W1wYgowlaKjjSdMSuAh88IUGLXUusK1RBT5hGBwrURyotS+avMcrg81oUjJ1I4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.190 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.163.44]) by szxga04-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4Y4t3S3jyCz21mcX; Sat, 7 Dec 2024 10:53:08 +0800 (CST) Received: from kwepemk500005.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.202.194.90]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B0B8B1402CA; Sat, 7 Dec 2024 10:54:48 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.174.178.46] (10.174.178.46) by kwepemk500005.china.huawei.com (7.202.194.90) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.11; Sat, 7 Dec 2024 10:54:48 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH] ubifs/lpt_commit: remove return at end of void function To: Pintu Kumar , , , CC: , References: <20241206130511.32592-1-quic_pintu@quicinc.com> From: Zhihao Cheng Message-ID: Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2024 10:54:47 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20241206130511.32592-1-quic_pintu@quicinc.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gbk"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems706-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.183) To kwepemk500005.china.huawei.com (7.202.194.90) ÔÚ 2024/12/6 21:05, Pintu Kumar дµÀ: > Noticed that there is a useless return statement at the end of void > function dump_lpt_leb(). > Just removing it. > > Signed-off-by: Pintu Kumar > --- > fs/ubifs/lpt_commit.c | 1 - > 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) Hi, Pintu. The title of the patch should be something like "ubifs: dump_lpt_leb: remove return at end of void function". See Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst. Otherwise, Reviewed-by: Zhihao Cheng > > diff --git a/fs/ubifs/lpt_commit.c b/fs/ubifs/lpt_commit.c > index aa8837e6247c..f2cb214581fd 100644 > --- a/fs/ubifs/lpt_commit.c > +++ b/fs/ubifs/lpt_commit.c > @@ -1932,7 +1932,6 @@ static void dump_lpt_leb(const struct ubifs_info *c, int lnum) > pr_err("(pid %d) finish dumping LEB %d\n", current->pid, lnum); > out: > vfree(buf); > - return; > } > > /** >