On Wed, 2008-12-03 at 18:52 +0100, Kay Sievers wrote: > On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 18:08, James Bottomley > <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, 2008-12-03 at 18:24 +0200, Vorobiev Dmitri wrote: > >> > This patch fixes the following compilation warning: > >> > > >> > CC [M] drivers/scsi/sgiwd93.o > >> > drivers/scsi/sgiwd93.c:314: warning: initialization from incompatible > >> > pointer type > >> > >> Any news about this one? I think this patch should go via linux-scsi, > >> unless you would be insisting on pushing it via linux-mips, in which case > >> I'll politely bug Ralf about it. :) > > > > Looks OK for the local change. > > > > Globally, having driver->remove and platform_driver->remove return int > > instead of void looks wrong. Particularly when the only use cases are > > in drivers/base/ and they all ignore the return code. > > > > Greg and Kay ... shouldn't we simply redefine the return values for the > > remove methods in these structures to return void (and thus match the > > use case)? > > Aren't there many many drivers across the tree, using the "int remove" version? Yes ... since it's a function prototype. However, if drivers/base simply discards the return, it's a trap we shouldn't be setting. James
