On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 20:00, James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, 2008-12-03 at 19:51 +0100, Kay Sievers wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 19:42, Vorobiev Dmitri <dmitri.vorobiev@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> 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. >> > >> > Hmmm, it does look like the return value is discarded, please see >> > drivers/base/dd.c::__device_release_driver() for details. >> > >> > Does this not deserve a good cleanup? >> >> Sure, it might be. If you want to patch hundreds of files, send >> patches to maintainers, patch drivers you can not even compile, we >> could do that. >> >> We are already in the middle of a ~400 files "struct device" bus_id >> conversion, and only very few maintainers respond to these patches. We >> also never got any reply to the SCSI bus_id patch we sent weeks ago. >> :) > > When did you send it? Searching the scsi archives on bus_id produces no > results, what was the subject line? http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/gregkh/patches.git;a=blob;f=driver-core/bus_id-scsi.patch;hb=HEAD Kay
