From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 351A27C0B2 for ; Tue, 12 Mar 2024 15:36:07 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710257769; cv=none; b=Z+a3G4af93wMh5i6me5pRT+PMFj4DNwxxYbHd9Jr2iq0lBAZlRgXpT6BRXJbXaItXfRLbusbUxcOsZZhXEzF0gh0tdxLNS8xd+8WWggdP70IQvCYshDQX7dliVIvu/70e1UfD6U4jO9qeEBF4cDLCqs3PxmSTRkgVhxPXuKQTfg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710257769; c=relaxed/simple; bh=px16BB2yL1LGNNnF1idex0fwqAdQ6VLGIXIo4UIpP4M=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=RDW6xri+16RbJFpYDf/IXoFHmepDAt1FoZFxHGJ27xblPcOytM6B2hyJq5P0ks7kdUN881GlZJmQuab3yKl1xt2HeLbOugG+qoGTvyEW7Wf2VV57iLgIoGCM4mWtBdRyLKBcVKxh2XDE9K2ayKpOyH1HFOS1NF2MCt1aYQY2wk8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=kernel.org X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,11011"; a="4826974" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.07,119,1708416000"; d="scan'208";a="4826974" Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by fmvoesa112.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 12 Mar 2024 08:36:07 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,11011"; a="914399956" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.07,119,1708416000"; d="scan'208";a="914399956" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.54]) by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 12 Mar 2024 08:36:05 -0700 Received: from andy by smile.fi.intel.com with local (Exim 4.97) (envelope-from ) id 1rk4Ad-0000000Bvnx-1G7J; Tue, 12 Mar 2024 17:36:03 +0200 Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 17:36:03 +0200 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven , kernel@pengutronix.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Paul Burton Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] auxdisplay: img-ascii-lcd: Convert to platform remove callback returning void Message-ID: References: <44de2d4c1fed6fe96b68ba9ad768d297b8f392a5.1710194084.git.u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 11:27:37AM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 09:17:54AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 10:59 PM Uwe Kleine-König > > wrote: > > > The .remove() callback for a platform driver returns an int which makes > > > many driver authors wrongly assume it's possible to do error handling by > > > returning an error code. However the value returned is ignored (apart > > > from emitting a warning) and this typically results in resource leaks. > > > > > > To improve here there is a quest to make the remove callback return > > > void. In the first step of this quest all drivers are converted to > > > .remove_new(), which already returns void. Eventually after all drivers > > > are converted, .remove_new() will be renamed to .remove(). > > > > > > Trivially convert this driver from always returning zero in the remove > > > callback to the void returning variant. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König > > > > Thanks for your patch! > > > > > --- a/drivers/auxdisplay/img-ascii-lcd.c > > > +++ b/drivers/auxdisplay/img-ascii-lcd.c > > > @@ -279,13 +279,12 @@ static int img_ascii_lcd_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > > * > > > * Return: 0 > > > > Please remove this line. > > Good catch, thanks. > > @Andy: Should I resend this patch? Or the whole series? Or do you want > to fixup while applying? Not big deal, I'll fix it whilst applying. Thank you! -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko