On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 21:17 +0200, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 09:38:20PM +0400, Kulikov Vasiliy wrote: > > create_proc_read_entry() may fail, if so return -ENOMEM. > > > > It can fail, but also we return NULL if procfs is disabled. I haven't > looked at it very carefully, would this patch break the module if procfs > was disabled? Probably you are right, but many drivers in tree compare return value with NULL. Some of them interpret this as error, some of them simply call pr_warn("Hmm, I cannot create file in proc, strange..."). Maybe there is more simplier way to check it without #ifdefs? > > The same applies to the similar patches in this set. > > regards, > dan carpenter > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html