On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 07:56:53PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: > 1) of_match_device returns const, so without the const the code would need > to cast that const away somewhere > 2) of_match_device is right to return const because > 2a) the data can actually be const > 2b) even if not const, it is shared between multiple instances of the same > device-type and thus should never be written too Sure, if it has already gone that way, keeping it on is probably the easiest way. > So as Russell already said, the use of const is correct here, and the best > thing to do is to simply keep it. It's not about whether this specific annotation is correct or not. It's that C as a language doesn't have good enough const support to have proper const annotations and tends to lead to practical problems often making the trade-off unclear in complex cases. Anyways, as written above, if it's propagation of existing ones and doesn't have mixed ro/rw usages, keeping it on probably is the eaiest. Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
