On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 07:42:15PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 05:27:55PM +0100, Liviu Dudau wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 05:57:13PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 03:52:22PM +0100, Liviu Dudau wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 03:28:29PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > > > When calling debugfs functions, there is no need to ever check the
> > > > > return value. The function can work or not, but the code logic should
> > > > > never do something different based on this.
> > > >
> > > > I remember when writing this code and testing not fully complete code that left
> > > > nodes around on removing the module that there were errors being returned by
> > > > debugfs_create_file(). Has that changed since 2 years ago? :)
> > >
> > > Errors can be returned if you do something foolish:
> > > - pass an error as a parent pointer
> > > - pass a name that is already present
> >
> > That is what I was hitting previously. If we follow the new advice of not
> > checking for errors does this mean I can now start to hide debugfs entries
> > by touching some debugfs files before modules get loaded?
>
> How can you "touch" a debugfs file today?
Touché! Yes, last time it was through my sloppy coding :)
>
> And even if there is a duplicate debugfs file, you shouldn't care as
> your driver should keep going even if creation of it fails as no
> functionality of the code should ever rely on debugfs.
Agree and understood. Thanks for taking the time to explain it to me!
Best regards,
Liviu
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
--
====================
| I would like to |
| fix the world, |
| but they're not |
| giving me the |
\ source code! /
---------------
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
