lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [May]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] gpio: gpiolib: set gpiochip_remove retval to void
On 05/30/2014 04:39 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 1:30 PM, abdoulaye berthe <berthe.ab@gmail.com> wrote:
>> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
>> @@ -1263,10 +1263,9 @@ static void gpiochip_irqchip_remove(struct gpio_chip *gpiochip);
>> *
>> * A gpio_chip with any GPIOs still requested may not be removed.
>> */
>> -int gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip)
>> +void gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip)
>> {
>> unsigned long flags;
>> - int status = 0;
>> unsigned id;
>>
>> acpi_gpiochip_remove(chip);
>> @@ -1278,24 +1277,15 @@ int gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip)
>> of_gpiochip_remove(chip);
>>
>> for (id = 0; id < chip->ngpio; id++) {
>> - if (test_bit(FLAG_REQUESTED, &chip->desc[id].flags)) {
>> - status = -EBUSY;
>> - break;
>> - }
>> - }
>> - if (status == 0) {
>> - for (id = 0; id < chip->ngpio; id++)
>> - chip->desc[id].chip = NULL;
>> -
>> - list_del(&chip->list);
>> + if (test_bit(FLAG_REQUESTED, &chip->desc[id].flags))
>> + panic("gpio: removing gpiochip with gpios still requested\n");
>
> panic?

NACK to the patch for this reason. The strongest thing you should do
here is WARN.

That said, I am not sure why we need this whole patch set in the first
place.

David Daney



>
> Is this likely to happen?
>
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
> Geert
>
> --
> Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org
>
> In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
> when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
> -- Linus Torvalds
>
>



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-05-30 20:21    [W:0.067 / U:0.860 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site