linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] greybus: loopback: remove gb_loopback_async_wait

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <2025062945-prologue-plutonium-870f@gregkh>
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2025 11:47:32 +0200
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Pranav Tyagi <pranav.tyagi03@...il.com>
Cc: greybus-dev@...ts.linaro.org, linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, pure.logic@...us-software.ie,
	johan@...nel.org, elder@...nel.org, skhan@...uxfoundation.org,
	linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH] greybus: loopback: remove gb_loopback_async_wait_all()

On Sat, Jun 28, 2025 at 12:01:21PM +0530, Pranav Tyagi wrote:
> Remove redundant gb_loopback_async_wait_all() as connection is disabled
> at the beginning and no further incoming/outgoing requests are possible.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Pranav Tyagi <pranav.tyagi03@...il.com>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c | 7 -------
>  1 file changed, 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c b/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c
> index 1f19323b0e1a..9d0d4308ad25 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c
> @@ -1110,13 +1110,6 @@ static void gb_loopback_disconnect(struct gb_bundle *bundle)
>  	gb_connection_latency_tag_disable(gb->connection);
>  	debugfs_remove(gb->file);
>  
> -	/*
> -	 * FIXME: gb_loopback_async_wait_all() is redundant now, as connection
> -	 * is disabled at the beginning and so we can't have any more
> -	 * incoming/outgoing requests.
> -	 */
> -	gb_loopback_async_wait_all(gb);

How was this tested?  It might be redundant but I don't think you can
delete this just yet, otherwise we would have done so a long time ago.

And your changelog just says the same thing as this comment, shouldn't
you write something different?

thanks,

greg k-h