[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200917101538.GO4282@kadam>
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2020 13:15:38 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To: Dan Scally <djrscally@...il.com>
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
robh@...nel.org, jorhand@...ux.microsoft.com,
linux-media@...r.kernel.org, kieran.bingham@...asonboard.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kitakar@...il.com,
sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com, bingbu.cao@...el.com,
mchehab@...nel.org, davem@...emloft.net, tian.shu.qiu@...el.com,
yong.zhi@...el.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] Add bridge driver to connect sensors to CIO2 device
via software nodes on ACPI platforms
On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 10:47:50AM +0100, Dan Scally wrote:
> Hi Greg - thanks for the comments, appreciate it (sorry there's so many,
> I'm new to both C and kernel work)
It's pretty impressive work if you're new to C...
> >
> >> + return;
> > No error value?
> The prototype for sync_state callbacks is to return void, so my
> understanding is it can't return an error value. I guess a better thing
> to do might be call another function performing cleanup and unloading
> the driver before the return or something along those lines though.
Yeah. I suspect you should be using a different callback instead of
->sync_state() but I don't know what... :/
regards,
dan carpenter
Powered by blists - more mailing lists