> On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 11:26, Julia Lawall wrote: >> 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. The goal of this patch is to make it possible to convert >> the >> platform_driver functions stored in the remove field such that they >> return >> void. This patch introduces a temporary field remove_new with return >> type >> void into the platform_driver structure, and updates the only place that >> the remove function is called to call the function in the remove_new >> field, >> if one is available. The subsequent patches update some drivers to use >> the >> remove_new field. > > why bother with remove -> remove_new convention ? Please see this email for the background: http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/12/10/231 > you'll get a > warning in C about the assignment, but you wont get a build failure, ...unless you compile with -Werror, which frequently the case. Dmitri -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html