From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754852AbYIQTm1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Sep 2008 15:42:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752926AbYIQTmR (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Sep 2008 15:42:17 -0400 Received: from h155.mvista.com ([63.81.120.155]:50336 "EHLO imap.sh.mvista.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752916AbYIQTmQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Sep 2008 15:42:16 -0400 Message-ID: <48D15DC8.60307@ru.mvista.com> Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 23:43:04 +0400 From: Sergei Shtylyov Organization: MontaVista Software Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040803 X-Accept-Language: ru, en-us, en-gb MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Morton Cc: Zev Weiss , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] [MTD] physmap.c: Check return of platform_device_register() References: <48CB5E9A.4010000@gmail.com> <20080917115746.e36cacc6.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20080917115746.e36cacc6.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello. Andrew Morton wrote: >>The PHYSMAP_COMPAT code had been ignoring the return value of >>platform_device_register() in the physmap_init() function. >>Signed-off-by: Zev Weiss [...] >>diff --git a/drivers/mtd/maps/physmap.c b/drivers/mtd/maps/physmap.c >>index 42d844f..6fba0d4 100644 >>--- a/drivers/mtd/maps/physmap.c >>+++ b/drivers/mtd/maps/physmap.c >>@@ -312,7 +312,7 @@ static int __init physmap_init(void) >> err = platform_driver_register(&physmap_flash_driver); >> #ifdef PHYSMAP_COMPAT >> if (err == 0) >>- platform_device_register(&physmap_flash); >>+ err = platform_device_register(&physmap_flash); >> #endif >> >> return err; > Your email client is performing space-stuffing, thus making the patches > unapplyable. Er... are you sure? The patch looks alright tab wise, even after quoting... > Presumably we should run platform_driver_unregister() if the > platform_device_register() failed. Why is that? There could be "normal" platform devices out there... WBR, Sergei