From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Anton Vorontsov Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/28] drivers/base/platform.c: Drop return value from platform_driver remove functions Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 01:48:54 +0300 Message-ID: <20081210224854.GA5167@zarina> References: <20081210163819.17cf4628@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <45755.88.114.236.15.1228932236.squirrel@webmail.movial.fi> <20081210212659.GA6132@zarina> <42393.88.114.236.15.1228946794.squirrel@webmail.movial.fi> Reply-To: cbouatmailru@gmail.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf8 Return-path: Received: from mail-bw0-f13.google.com ([209.85.218.13]:47307 "EHLO mail-bw0-f13.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752934AbYLJWyV (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Dec 2008 17:54:21 -0500 Received: by bwz6 with SMTP id 6so1633505bwz.13 for ; Wed, 10 Dec 2008 14:54:19 -0800 (PST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <42393.88.114.236.15.1228946794.squirrel@webmail.movial.fi> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Vorobiev Dmitri Cc: Alan Cox , Julia Lawall , gregkh@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 12:06:34AM +0200, Vorobiev Dmitri wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 08:03:56PM +0200, Vorobiev Dmitri wrote: > >> > On Wed, 10 Dec 2008 17:26:26 +0100 (CET) > >> > Julia Lawall wrote: > >> > > >> >> From: Julia Lawall > >> >> > >> >> The return value of the remove function of a driver structure, and > >> thus > >> >> of > >> >> a platform_driver structure, is ultimately ignored > >> > > >> > Currently > >> > >> Are there really any plans about actually using the return value? > > > > It's often used by the drivers, but currently not handled by > > the subsystem. For example, _remove() callback might return -EBUSY > > or -EAGAIN, which means that whoever called the _remove() should > > try later. > > Sure, it's easy to find drivers, which that return a non-dummy value from > the remove() callback thinking that someone up there will take care of the > error. > > The point is, however, that [...] > SCSI maintainers do not apply the patch This sometimes happens. You can try to repost your original patch, and in the commit message briefly describe that return type is unlikely to change, and give a pointer to this discussion. -- Anton Vorontsov email: cbouatmailru@gmail.com irc://irc.freenode.net/bd2