On Thu, May 06, 2021 at 10:40:18AM +0200, Fabio Aiuto wrote: > On Thu, May 06, 2021 at 09:52:13AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > > On Thu, May 06, 2021 at 08:48:44AM +0200, Fabio Aiuto wrote: > > > Hello Uwe, > > > > > > On Wed, May 05, 2021 at 10:29:22PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > > > > The driver core ignores the return value of struct bus_type::remove() > > > > because there is only little that can be done. To simplify the quest to > > > > make this function return void, let struct vio_driver::remove() return > > > > void, too. All users already unconditionally return 0, this commit makes > > > > it obvious that returning an error code is a bad idea. > > > > > > looks like that the commit description hardly matches what you changed > > > here. You changed the return type of handler remove() of struct > > > anybuss_client_driver. Are the latter and bus_type tied in some > > > fashion? > > > > Oh, vio_driver leaked from my copy-and-paste template. > > > > > Why using :: notation? > > > > If you have a better suggestion I'm all ears. > > maybe a simple dot? '::' reminds c++ or rust, this patch fixes c code. > But I don't think it is a real issue, I was just wondering why you choose > '::' In Smatch I use: (struct vio_driver)->remove But in emails I normally put a () on the end of function names. regards, dan carpenter
