[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2272579.vn7eKdEJtW@wuerfel>
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 17:18:35 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>,
Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-rpi-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpiolib: fix callers of gpiochip_remove
On Tuesday 30 September 2014 16:11:28 Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 3:24 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
>
> > A recent API change made gpiochip_remove return void instead of an
> > error value, which broke drivers that use this return value:
> >
> > gpio/gpio-sch311x.c: In function 'sch311x_gpio_probe':
> > gpio/gpio-sch311x.c:286:7: error: void value not ignored as it ought to be
> > if (gpiochip_remove(&priv->blocks[i].chip))
> > ^
> >
> > This changes the callers that I have found during randconfig testing
> > so they no longer depend on the error code.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> > Fixes: e1db1706c86e ("gpio: gpiolib: set gpiochip_remove retval to void")
>
> Hm AFAICT these are already fixes in my GPIO tree
> and linux-next...
>
> Am I looking in the wrong place?
>
>
No, it's my fault, I seem to have a patch in my tree that reverts those
changes.
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists