On 15 May 2014 14:16, Chander Kashyap <chander.kash...@linaro.org> wrote: > Yes exactly. All users of this API need to be modified to handle > EEXIST as success.
There are very few: arch/arm/mach-omap2/opp.c arch/arm/mach-vexpress/spc.c drivers/devfreq/exynos/exynos4_bus.c drivers/devfreq/exynos/exynos5_bus.c So shouldn't be a problem fixing them.. > To avoid this returning 0 was suggested But the bigger problem is that all new users have to know about this and must take care of it, would also result in code duplication. So, if I think this way: The purpose of dev_pm_opp_add() is to make sure the OPP is present with the device, when this function returns.. And with a duplicate entry, we can still confirm that. Over that, I couldn't think of any situation where the caller wants to react to -EXIST separately. They will still consider it as success. So, maybe returning '0' isn't that bad of an idea :) @Nishanth ? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/