On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 02:49:46PM +0200, Dmitri Vorobiev wrote: > Ben Dooks wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 05:27:56PM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote: > >> From: Julia Lawall <julia@xxxxxxx> > >> > >> The return value of the remove function of a driver structure, and thus of > >> a platform_driver structure, is ultimately ignored, and is thus > >> unnecessary. This patch removes the return value for the remove function > >> stored in a platform_driver structure. > >> > >> For the files drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c and > >> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c, the original return value was the value > >> of a variable storing the result of calling i2c_del_adapter. I have thus > >> also deleted the declaration and initialization of this variable. For the > >> other files, the return values were always 0. > >> > >> A simplified version of the semantic patch that makes this change is as > >> follows: (http://www.emn.fr/x-info/coccinelle/) > > > > I take it remove_new will eventually be renamed to remove once all > > the changes have been made? > > > > Unless there are any objections I'll add this to the merge list for > > the next window. > > Please be careful since the drivers/base/ part has not been applied > yet, so I'm Cc:ing Greg now for his opinion. The more I think about it, the more I think it should not be changed, sorry. We should leave the return value and do something based on the value of it if we can. thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
