Re: Smatch: False positive in __dwc3_gadget_kick_transfer()

Hi Dan,

Thank you for the explanation and the manager's joke.

On Wed, Mar 4, 2026 at 7:09=E2=80=AFPM Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.=
org> wrote:

> Just do "return 0;"  It's more readable, since it removes a level of
> indirection and we don't have to think about what ret is.

I agree. Since the !ret condition ensures that ret is 0 at that
point, using an explicit return makes the successful "no-op" path
immediately clear to the reader and removes the logical overhead of
tracking the variable.

> I always recall a discuss between my managers:
> Q: But if we do that then how will they know where the zero comes from?
> A: We'll make our zeroes will *extra* round.  :P

I will ensure my zeros are extra round in the patch. I'll prepare a
clean-up patch for the USB tree to implement this and silence the
warning.

Best regards,
Zeeshan