linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] SCSI: fix the return type of the remove() method in sgi

To: "Kay Sievers" <kay.sievers@vrfy.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] SCSI: fix the return type of the remove() method in sgiwd93.c
From: "Vorobiev Dmitri" <dmitri.vorobiev@movial.fi>
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2008 21:07:34 +0200 (EET)
Cc: "Vorobiev Dmitri" <dmitri.vorobiev@movial.fi>, "James Bottomley" <james.bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, "Greg KH" <greg@kroah.com>, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Importance: Normal
In-reply-to: <ac3eb2510812031051k9d9312bma119bfae35afc230@mail.gmail.com>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <1227140357-29921-1-git-send-email-dmitri.vorobiev@movial.fi> <46353.88.114.226.209.1228321494.squirrel@webmail.movial.fi> <1228324123.5551.25.camel@localhost.localdomain> <ac3eb2510812030952k5b57a9c7qb68e3684de170d75@mail.gmail.com> <1228327306.5551.36.camel@localhost.localdomain> <35647.88.114.226.209.1228329736.squirrel@webmail.movial.fi> <ac3eb2510812031051k9d9312bma119bfae35afc230@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.9a
> On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 19:42, Vorobiev Dmitri <dmitri.vorobiev@movial.fi>
> 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@hansenpartnership.com> 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.
> :)
>
> Even when it's "a good cleanup", with maintainers not responding, and
> supporting it, it's a real pain to change things like this. But, if
> you want to go ahead and do that, let us know.

Well, I don't really want to look like a coward, but I guess this a good
project for Kernel Janitors, and I'm Cc:ing their mailing list now.

Dmitri

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>