From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@osdl.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: benjamin.li@qlogic.com,
"bugme-daemon@kernel-bugs.osdl.org"
<bugme-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 7708] New: unregister_netdev() should return unregister_netdevice() return code
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 15:50:57 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061218155057.1904f666@freekitty> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20061218152111.868f9284.akpm@osdl.org>
On Mon, 18 Dec 2006 15:21:11 -0800
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Dec 2006 14:56:31 -0800
> bugme-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote:
>
> > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7708
> >
> > Summary: unregister_netdev() should return unregister_netdevice()
> > return code
> > Kernel Version: 2.6.19.1
> > Status: NEW
> > Severity: low
> > Owner: acme@conectiva.com.br
> > Submitter: benjamin.li@qlogic.com
> >
> >
> > net/core/dev.c:unregister_netdev() function is a wrapper around
> > net/core/dev.c:unregister_netdevice(). The unregister_netdevice() function
> > returns a return code while unregister_netdev() currently does not. For
> > completeness, we should pass the return code from unregister_netdevice() all the
> > way to the caller. unregister_netdev() should not swallow the return code.
> >
>
> Certainly there's some truth in that ;)
>
> Is there some reason why you want to test the unregister_netdev() return
> value?
The only return value is -ENODEV, so I would vote for both just being void
--
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@osdl.org>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-12-18 23:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <200612182256.kBIMuVio025766@fire-2.osdl.org>
2006-12-18 23:21 ` [Bugme-new] [Bug 7708] New: unregister_netdev() should return unregister_netdevice() return code Andrew Morton
2006-12-18 23:50 ` Stephen Hemminger [this message]
2006-12-19 1:37 ` David Miller
2006-12-19 5:05 ` [PATCH] net: unregister_netdevice as void Stephen Hemminger
2007-02-07 8:10 ` David Miller
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20061218155057.1904f666@freekitty \
--to=shemminger@osdl.org \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=benjamin.li@qlogic.com \
--cc=bugme-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).