On Mon, May 08, 2023 at 07:10:27PM -0300, Maíra Canal wrote:
> Hi Uwe,
>
> On 5/7/23 13:26, 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 (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.
> >
> > Trivially convert this driver from always returning zero in the remove
> > callback to the void returning variant.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_kunit_helpers.c | 5 ++---
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_kunit_helpers.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_kunit_helpers.c
> > index e98b4150f556..049b98daedbb 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_kunit_helpers.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/tests/drm_kunit_helpers.c
> > @@ -19,14 +19,13 @@ static int fake_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > return 0;
> > }
> > -static int fake_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > +static void fake_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > {
> > - return 0;
> > }
>
> This function was removed on commit 96c25b03145a. I'm not sure if
> we should bring it back.
Indeed. I sent my patch series before v6.4-rc1 was published and so
based it on top of v6.3, which doesn't include 96c25b03145a. Please
don't bring back fake_remove(), just drop this patch instead.
Thanks
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
