On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 06:36:21PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 04:30:37PM +0100, Daniel Thompson wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 02:09:27PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > > > Up to now ili9320_remove() returns zero unconditionally. Make it return > > > void instead which makes it easier to see in the callers that there is > > > no error to handle. > > > > Ultimately the actions here boil down to an SPI write which could fail > > so we could make an attempt to correct the broken error propagation > > inside ili9320.c instead... > > > > > Also the return value of spi remove callbacks is ignored anyway. > > > > ... which does inform the above question. > > > > Is this patch a local fix or part of a larger plan to eventually change > > the return value of the spi_remove to void? > > This is the motivation yes, so there isn't any sane way to propagate an > error. The only thing you could sensibly do is to print an error > message. But the device will go away no matter what you do. (Well, you > could do an endless-loop to "delay" removing, but ...) Great. Thanks for confirming... and in that case: Reviewed-by: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@xxxxxxxxxx> Daniel.
