On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 04:38:26PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 05:08:57PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 03:56:06PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > > > > Given that all the rest of the function is doing is further debugfs > > > operations and when it fails people trying to use the debugfs do welcome > > > some diagnostics I'm not sure that's particularly helpful. > > > The only way it will fail is if we are out of memory. And you are in a > > bigger mess then, no one cares about debugfs calls, just make them and > > move on, you should never care about the result of such a call. > > No, it also fails if there's already something with the same name in > debugfs which can happen as as a result of configuration. This gets > confusing for users, they see the debugfs files they're expecting but > the contents don't match up at all.
How can you allow a duplicate name for the other regmap stuff? Will that not also cause a collision somewhere else? Anyway, if this is that big of a problem, ok, but then your code will run differently if debugfs is enabled or not, which isn't ok. Don't rely on debugfs to do your name filtering for you :) thanks, greg k-h
