On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 04:50:57PM +0900, Inki Dae wrote: > Hi, > > 2023년 5월 8일 (월) 오전 1:32, Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>님이 작성: > > > > Hello, > > > > this patch series adapts the platform drivers below drivers/gpu/drm > > to use the .remove_new() callback. Compared to the traditional .remove() > > callback .remove_new() returns no value. This is a good thing because > > First of all, I apologize for the delay in providing my review comments. > > Not related to this patch but seems that the "remove_new" callback > naming implicitly implies that there is no need to return anything > since its return type is void. To help users understand the intended > behavior based on the callback name, how about considering a modified > naming convention like "remove_no_return" or something similar? > > The relevant patch has already been merged as outlined below, > author Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2022-12-09 > 16:09:14 +0100 > committer Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2023-01-17 > 19:04:17 +0100 > commit 5c5a7680e67ba6fbbb5f4d79fa41485450c1985c (patch) > tree 0b6dbc003a6bb4a3f7fb084d31326bbfa3ba3f7c > parent 7bbb89b420d9e290cb34864832de8fcdf2c140dc (diff) > download linux-5c5a7680e67ba6fbbb5f4d79fa41485450c1985c.tar.gz > platform: Provide a remove callback that returns no value > > Maybe a trivial thing but how about renaming it? I think the postfix, > 'new', is a very generic word. I think you could introduce another > patch for it if you think it's reasonable. .remove_new is only a temporary name. Once all drivers are converted, .remove is changed to return void and then all drivers are converted back. While "remove_new" might not be a brilliant name choice, touching all already converted drivers again just to improve the temporary measures doesn't sound right. Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
