Re: [PATCH] greybus: loopback: remove gb_loopback_async_wait_all()

[Pranav Tyagi]

On Sun, Jun 29, 2025 at 3:17 PM Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> 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@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  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

Hi,

Thanks for the feedback. On checking the context, I found the FIXME to
be trivial and build-test the patch. But, it definitely can not guarantee
runtime correctness. I will also try to write better changelogs for future
patches.

Apologies for the noise.

Regards
Pranav Tyagi