Re: [PATCH] device_for_each_child(): kill pointless warning noise

[Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>]

Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 21:05:18 -0400
> Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org> wrote:
> 
>> As the last patch demonstrated, it is quite valid for a caller to ignore
>> the return value of device_for_each_child(), given that the return value
>> is wholly dependent on the actor -- which in practice often has a
>> hardcoded return value.
> 
> Yes, but almost all of the instances which you found are flat-out *wrong*. 
> They're returning 0 or 1 at random places in the callchain because they're
> calling intermediate void-returning functions which are themselves dropping
> error codes on the floor instead of returning them.

"almost all"  Thus it is wrong to _force_ the usage model on the caller.

It should be obvious that a simple search need not _require_ a dummy 
return value, that is promptly ignored.

See previous email for examples.

	Jeff