[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150408114437.GI10964@mwanda>
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2015 14:44:37 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To: Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>
Cc: devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
Rodolfo Giometti <giometti@...eenne.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <JBottomley@...allels.com>,
Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
Willy Tarreau <willy@...a-x.org>, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/14] parport: return value of attach and
parport_register_driver
On Wed, Apr 08, 2015 at 02:38:32PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> 1) We can't apply this patch on its own so this way of breaking up the
> patches doesn't work.
>
The right thing is to do add an attach_ret().
static int do_attach(drv)
{
if (drv->attach_ret)
return drv->attach_ret();
drv->attach();
return 0;
}
Then we convert one driver to use the new function pointer and see if
it simplifies the code. If so we can transition the others as well. If
not then we give up.
regards,
dan carpenter
--
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