From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39CAEC433EF for ; Thu, 31 Mar 2022 13:19:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236731AbiCaNVm (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Mar 2022 09:21:42 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:45344 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232629AbiCaNVl (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Mar 2022 09:21:41 -0400 Received: from metis.ext.pengutronix.de (metis.ext.pengutronix.de [IPv6:2001:67c:670:201:290:27ff:fe1d:cc33]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9005818544C for ; Thu, 31 Mar 2022 06:19:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from drehscheibe.grey.stw.pengutronix.de ([2a0a:edc0:0:c01:1d::a2]) by metis.ext.pengutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nZuiO-0008QF-0A; Thu, 31 Mar 2022 15:19:52 +0200 Received: from [2a0a:edc0:0:900:1d::77] (helo=ptz.office.stw.pengutronix.de) by drehscheibe.grey.stw.pengutronix.de with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1nZuiN-0007dg-VN; Thu, 31 Mar 2022 15:19:50 +0200 Received: from ukl by ptz.office.stw.pengutronix.de with local (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1nZuiL-000FOJ-La; Thu, 31 Mar 2022 15:19:49 +0200 Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2022 15:19:49 +0200 From: Uwe =?utf-8?Q?Kleine-K=C3=B6nig?= To: Pavel Machek Cc: Riku Voipio , linux-leds@vger.kernel.org, kernel@pengutronix.de Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] leds: pca9532: Make pca9532_destroy_devices() return void Message-ID: <20220331131949.hboij2vkptpxdvme@pengutronix.de> References: <20211021121639.79179-1-u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> <20211022101707.1194979-1-u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> <20220110072317.sysdgvuzvlzzbcsb@pengutronix.de> <20220111211223.GA26173@duo.ucw.cz> <20220111213032.5hqlgptdqjxvnikj@pengutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="c5ecghwn7taosmmt" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220111213032.5hqlgptdqjxvnikj@pengutronix.de> X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2a0a:edc0:0:c01:1d::a2 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ukl@pengutronix.de X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on metis.ext.pengutronix.de); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-PTX-Original-Recipient: linux-leds@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-leds@vger.kernel.org --c5ecghwn7taosmmt Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 10:30:32PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-K=F6nig wrote: > On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 10:12:23PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: > > On Mon 2022-01-10 08:23:17, Uwe Kleine-K=F6nig wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 22, 2021 at 12:17:07PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-K=F6nig wrote: > > > > Up to now pca9532_destroy_devices() returns always zero because it's > > > > always called with data !=3D NULL. Remove the never-taken error pat= h and > > > > make it return void which makes it easier to see in the callers that > > > > there is no error to handle. > > > >=20 > > > > Also the return value of i2c remove callbacks is ignored anyway. > > > >=20 > > > > Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-K=F6nig > > >=20 > > > Ping. This patch is part of an effort to make the i2c remove callback= a > > > void function, too. Are there any concerns, or plans to pick up this > > > patch? > >=20 > > It looks like a simple cleanup with no effect outside of the > > driver. Am I wrong? >=20 > Yes, there is no intended effect on the compiled code. ah, oh, the answer should have been "No". :-) > The reason I want this patch is that I work on making the i2c remove > callback return void. As this has to touch all i2c drivers, the changes > to these should be as simple as possible, so ideally I just want to drop > the "return 0" there. Every return that might return a value !=3D 0 is > more complicated to handle there. >=20 > So it's just to prepare this change an to make the code a tad easier to > read for a human. Is this convincing? Is this patch still on the "to-review" (or still better the "to-apply") list? Best regards Uwe --=20 Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-K=F6nig | Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ | --c5ecghwn7taosmmt Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAABCgAdFiEEfnIqFpAYrP8+dKQLwfwUeK3K7AkFAmJFqnIACgkQwfwUeK3K 7AmeswgAlPP3wyOQny5R3989gP8T8ChH/ZiGrZ6TvYBdbQFgqi9cRJF5wNc0GyKX St5VGDyD5EgaSkPpgFofpDjvcc+EPIxm6w7ETX9n1NgC20SI+ZbqOTCucSp+xR/t exP+hS2R7KXF+4wFA3QSengbQ/K4IgszbL/r0CqnW8Mg5iuwaf85B5MY+7RRM58t 1gGVKNUctmE0X/eCivdHVWWKlf8eOwTnaXYBYK0QQG1p6q5Cuj76QE2qzYfPzmxA mYJRqWbyRiJFcm/AITyRaGZor/a7Gg/HGdbFhwmr/J6k8di4QHT7/OMt4Nm29nza 0/vByx+UohbBbe9HM0iZzIXHgpc9DQ== =9FmP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --c5ecghwn7taosmmt--