[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <42D8621F-E36D-4F4F-9143-3F7773EC834E@codeaurora.org>
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2015 10:46:11 -0400
From: Timur Tabi <timur@...eaurora.org>
To: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Shanker Donthineni <shankerd@...eaurora.org>,
awallis@...eaurora.org, abhimany@...eaurora.org,
will.deacon@....com, Vipul Gandhi <vgandhi@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] hvc_dcc: don't ignore errors during initialization
On Jul 1, 2015, at 7:54 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>>
>> + /* Returns -1 if error */
>> + ret = hvc_instantiate(0, 0, &hvc_dcc_get_put_ops);
>> +
>> + return ret < 0 ? -ENODEV : 0;
>
> Why not just return the value that hvc_instantiate returns? And maybe we
> should change those -1 in hvc_instantiate into -EPERM?
Well, I didn't want to change common HVC code. I would have to change all the other drivers that call hvc_instatiate as well. I agree that returning -1 is bad, but fixing that is something that should be done in another patch.
>>
>> - hvc_alloc(0, 0, &hvc_dcc_get_put_ops, 128);
>> - return 0;
>> + p = hvc_alloc(0, 0, &hvc_dcc_get_put_ops, 128);
>> +
>> + return IS_ERR(p) ? PTR_ERR(p) : 0;
>
> return PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO()?
Yes, thanks. I'll change it.
--
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