Hello Lee, On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 05:24:21PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > On Thu, 13 Jan 2022, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > > > This function returns 0 unconditionally, so there is no benefit in > > returning a value at all and make the caller do error checking. > > > > Also the caller (twl_remove()) cannot do anything sensible with an error > > code. Passing it up the call stack isn't a good option because the i2c core > > ignores error codes (apart from emitting an error message). > > > > Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/mfd/twl-core.c | 4 ++-- > > drivers/mfd/twl-core.h | 2 +- > > drivers/mfd/twl6030-irq.c | 3 +-- > > 3 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > Applied, thanks. I would have expected these to appear in next since you wrote to have applied this series. But they have not though your claim to have applied them is over three weeks old now?! :-\ Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
