On Wed, 02 Dec 2020 13:14:06 +0100, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > Hello Michael, > > > > On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 09:48:30AM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote: > >> On Thu, 26 Nov 2020 17:59:50 +0100, > >> Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > >> > > >> > The driver core ignores the return value of struct device_driver::remove > >> > because there is only little that can be done. For the shutdown callback > >> > it's ps3_system_bus_shutdown() which ignores the return value. > >> > > >> > To simplify the quest to make struct device_driver::remove return void, > >> > let struct ps3_system_bus_driver::remove return void, too. All users > >> > already unconditionally return 0, this commit makes it obvious that > >> > returning an error code is a bad idea and ensures future users behave > >> > accordingly. > >> > > >> > Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> For the sound bit: > >> Acked-by: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@xxxxxxx> > > > > assuming that you are the one who will apply this patch: Note that it > > depends on patch 1 that Takashi already applied to his tree. So you > > either have to wait untils patch 1 appears in some tree that you merge > > before applying, or you have to take patch 1, too. (With Takashi > > optinally dropping it then.) > > Thanks. I've picked up both patches. > > If Takashi doesn't want to rebase his tree to drop patch 1 that's OK, it > will just arrive in mainline via two paths, but git should handle it. Yeah, I'd like to avoid rebasing, so let's get it merge from both trees. git can handle such a case gracefully. thanks, Takashi
