From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 F3E5B7E107; Wed, 30 Apr 2025 12:05:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746014747; cv=none; b=mphUwny7jcp5pNhf+HzA4RsSB0rstCXJ2V3QUGNNWiz/nxQkonhr3CjLShP2h/7kiNGlDK5h/j3kWJqt/kbeN2G789bD1owmoYKXIBe5Owki+iEcMeJgxvzddeKAY6P07PHityyY3yC9eLZTRwfAM6u5uOsm0gNvjfN/ezLF2B8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746014747; c=relaxed/simple; bh=nZo6aZZpdiBBHzLRsbGar147DbeG+1FEzKl7AA6QWPc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=aAaWwODRRLijsMrdf0dREz/yBKmdDYvHgepliVDVu1WkOBd+NsuCgILOmCpZnLW6awt4WJA389OBu6sDRKY9u5xRGzuRdzOnXrPfZxy4aFgISH+SF0PQFKxga2LvBdCIvqfKwH8zu7yJgXijdSYCv4TIlNqNM9DZtFdhPUVQeus= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b=g8AoANsh; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b="g8AoANsh" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0FA3BC4CEE9; Wed, 30 Apr 2025 12:05:45 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1746014746; bh=nZo6aZZpdiBBHzLRsbGar147DbeG+1FEzKl7AA6QWPc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=g8AoANshaZ+ynDzEt95pf+JZI5d9PzVsIdFuqQ+4Ny0bk72gdlVAczUHmr/V1R553 wIodNuyT/XqABnV6my6y3PWfDUnhO0rP0XKdVNUDokv8QoSdNPUrPvD92oIn8gcmZq ZfbsR+xM2iczJzKORjaHHO8efLicMeswQclKNq3A= Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025 09:21:21 +0200 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org, patches@lists.linux.dev, Mark Brown , Sasha Levin Subject: Re: [PATCH 6.6 020/204] ASoC: qcom: lpass: Make asoc_qcom_lpass_cpu_platform_remove() return void Message-ID: <2025043003-goon-retouch-debd@gregkh> References: <20250429161059.396852607@linuxfoundation.org> <20250429161100.253501778@linuxfoundation.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 08:54:30AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > Hello, > > On Tue, Apr 29, 2025 at 06:41:48PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > 6.6-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. > > > > ------------------ > > > > From: Uwe Kleine-König > > > > [ Upstream commit d0cc676c426d1958989fac2a0d45179fb9992f0a ] > > > > 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 (mostly) ignored > > 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. > > > > asoc_qcom_lpass_cpu_platform_remove() returned zero unconditionally. > > Make it return void instead and convert all users to struct > > platform_device::remove_new(). > > > > Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231013221945.1489203-15-u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de > > Signed-off-by: Mark Brown > > Stable-dep-of: a93dad6f4e6a ("ASoC: q6apm-dai: make use of q6apm_get_hw_pointer") > > I didn't try to actually apply the patches without this, but I guess the > upside of this commit is only to prevent a trivial merge conflict in > sound/soc/qcom/lpass.h. > > Not sure this is justification enough to backport this patch to stable. > (Totally fine if you think it is, just sharing my thoughts.) merge conflicts are bad, adding additional patches to prevent that is good :)