Hello, I apologize for the insufficient explanation. --- Before the change: "end_session: mutex_unlock(&st->lock); iio_trigger_notify_done(indio_dev->trig); return IRQ_HANDLED; flush_fifo: /* Flush HW and SW FIFOs. */ inv_reset_fifo(indio_dev); mutex_unlock(&st->lock); iio_trigger_notify_done(indio_dev->trig); return IRQ_HANDLED; " --- After the change: "flush_fifo: /* Flush HW and SW FIFOs. */ inv_reset_fifo(indio_dev); end_session: mutex_unlock(&st->lock); iio_trigger_notify_done(indio_dev->trig); return IRQ_HANDLED;" --- Here, 'flush_fifo' and 'end_session' are not the same. However, the work of 'flush_fifo' is a superset of 'end_session'. On Sun, Sep 1, 2024 at 9:08 PM Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > 'flush_fifo' label performs same task as 'endsession' label > > end_session? > > The number of actions differ between involved jump targets. > > > > immediately after calling 'env_reset_fifo' function. > > so i remove that duplication. > > * You would like to specify a corresponding goto chain at the moment, > don't you? > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst?h=v6.11-rc5#n526 > > * How do you think about to increase the application of scope-based resource management? firstly I understood that you might be referring to RAII. but I think this issue is not related to RAII. thanks for response. > > > Regards, > Markus