[PATCH 1/1] staging: greybus: remove unnecessary goto

[PATCH 1/1] staging: greybus: remove unnecessary goto

[Haasham Khan]

Signed-off-by: Haasham Khan <haasham93@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c | 4 ----
 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c b/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c
index efc69c10cffe..284935fded12 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c
@@ -609,10 +609,6 @@ static int gb_loopback_async_transfer(struct gb_loopback *gb, u32 len)
 					     request, len + sizeof(*request),
 					     len + response_len,
 					     gb_loopback_async_transfer_complete);
-	if (retval)
-		goto gb_error;
-
-gb_error:
 	kfree(request);
 	return retval;
 }
-- 
2.53.0

Re: [PATCH 1/1] staging: greybus: remove unnecessary goto

[Jeremy Dean Clifton]

On 10/20/26 7:19 AM, Haasham Khan wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Haasham Khan<haasham93@gmail.com>
> ---
>   drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c | 4 ----
>   1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c b/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c
> index efc69c10cffe..284935fded12 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c
> @@ -609,10 +609,6 @@ static int gb_loopback_async_transfer(struct gb_loopback *gb, u32 len)
>   					     request, len + sizeof(*request),
>   					     len + response_len,
>   					     gb_loopback_async_transfer_complete);
> -	if (retval)
> -		goto gb_error;
> -
> -gb_error:
>   	kfree(request);
>   	return retval;
>   }
> -- 2.53.0

A few things here:

You don't have a commit message explaining anything. You need something 
there explaining what your changing and why.

Also, it looks like you're starting a series ("1/1"). That is not needed.

I'm not sure the why you have a series here, but the big thing missing 
here is your commit message.

Jeremy Dean Clifton

[PATCH 1/1] staging: greybus: remove unnecessary goto

[Haasham Khan]

Signed-off-by: Haasham Khan <haasham93@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c | 4 ----
 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c b/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c
index efc69c10cffe..284935fded12 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c
@@ -609,10 +609,6 @@ static int gb_loopback_async_transfer(struct gb_loopback *gb, u32 len)
 					     request, len + sizeof(*request),
 					     len + response_len,
 					     gb_loopback_async_transfer_complete);
-	if (retval)
-		goto gb_error;
-
-gb_error:
 	kfree(request);
 	return retval;
 }
-- 
2.53.0

Re: [PATCH 1/1] staging: greybus: remove unnecessary goto

[Greg KH]

On Tue, Oct 20, 2026 at 12:33:10PM +0000, Haasham Khan wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Haasham Khan <haasham93@gmail.com>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c | 4 ----
>  1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c b/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c
> index efc69c10cffe..284935fded12 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c
> @@ -609,10 +609,6 @@ static int gb_loopback_async_transfer(struct gb_loopback *gb, u32 len)
>  					     request, len + sizeof(*request),
>  					     len + response_len,
>  					     gb_loopback_async_transfer_complete);
> -	if (retval)
> -		goto gb_error;
> -
> -gb_error:
>  	kfree(request);
>  	return retval;
>  }
> -- 
> 2.53.0
> 

Hi,

This is the friendly patch-bot of Greg Kroah-Hartman.  You have sent him
a patch that has triggered this response.  He used to manually respond
to these common problems, but in order to save his sanity (he kept
writing the same thing over and over, yet to different people), I was
created.  Hopefully you will not take offence and will fix the problem
in your patch and resubmit it so that it can be accepted into the Linux
kernel tree.

You are receiving this message because of the following common error(s)
as indicated below:

- You did not specify a description of why the patch is needed, or
  possibly, any description at all, in the email body.  Please read the
  section entitled "The canonical patch format" in the kernel file,
  Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst for what is needed in
  order to properly describe the change.

If you wish to discuss this problem further, or you have questions about
how to resolve this issue, please feel free to respond to this email and
Greg will reply once he has dug out from the pending patches received
from other developers.

thanks,

greg k-h's patch email bot