On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 12:49:03AM +0000, Saleem, Shiraz wrote: > The API is quite confusing now. If drivers are not expected to fail > the destroy and there is no way to propagate the device failures, > then the return type should be a void. More or less, drivers can only return -EAGAIN with the idea that a future call during the close process will eventually succeed. Any permanent failure will trigger WARN_ON and a memory leak Maybe we should switch the return code to bool or something to be a little clearer that it is request to retry, not a failure? Jason
