On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 09:39:15AM +0300, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> Oh OK. Care to clarify a bit why we are not allowed to return errors
> on remove though? Are we getting rid of the return value for remove?
> Sorry if I'm not following the cunning plan here :)
Yes, that's the plan. If you look at the caller of the remove functions
(before 5c5a7680e67ba6fbbb5f4d79fa41485450c1985c):
static void platform_remove(struct device *_dev)
{
struct platform_driver *drv = to_platform_driver(_dev->driver);
struct platform_device *dev = to_platform_device(_dev);
if (drv->remove) {
int ret = drv->remove(dev);
if (ret)
dev_warn(_dev, "remove callback returned a non-zero value. This will be ignored.\n");
}
dev_pm_domain_detach(_dev, true);
}
you see it's pointless to return an error value. But the prototype
seduces driver authors to do it yielding to error that can easily
prevented if .remove returns void. See also
5c5a7680e67ba6fbbb5f4d79fa41485450c1985c for some background and details
of the quest.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
