Hello, [Dropped Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz and Michal Januszewski from Cc, their email addresses bounced] On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 07:04:54PM +0100, Helge Deller wrote: > Hello Uwe, > > On 3/19/23 00:53, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > > this series adapts the platform drivers below drivers/video/fbdev to use the > > .remove_new() callback. Compared to the traditional .remove() callback > > .remove_new() returns no value. This is a good thing because the driver core > > doesn't (and cannot) cope for errors during remove. The only effect of a > > non-zero return value in .remove() is that the driver core emits a warning. The > > device is removed anyhow and an early return from .remove() usually yields a > > resource leak. > > > > By changing the remove callback to return void driver authors cannot > > reasonably assume any more that there is some kind of cleanup later. > > > > The first patch simplifies the remove callback of one driver to obviously > > always return zero. After that all drivers are converted trivially to > > .remove_new(). > > Thanks for that patch series. It's a nice cleanup. > I've applied it to the fbdev "for-next" git tree for now to get some compile testing. > I hope that's ok for you. > > Regarding the new "remove_new" struct member I'd prefer a better name but don't > have any idea yet... Ideally we won't have to life with it for long. The eventual plan is to switch back to "remove" once all drivers are converted. So I didn't think intensively about a better name. Did you know that struct i2c_driver has a "temporary" .probe_new() callback since 2016? Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
