Re: [PATCH] gpio: gpiolib: set gpiochip_remove retval to void
Hi abdoulaye,
On Fri, 30 May 2014 00:32:02 +0200 abdoulaye berthe wrote:
>
> + if (test_bit(FLAG_REQUESTED, >desc[id].flags))
> + panic("gpio: removing gpiochip with gpios still
> requested\n");
Someone else already commented that panic is probably overkill ... is
there no way to log this and continue?
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwells...@canb.auug.org.au
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
[PATCH] gpio: gpiolib: set gpiochip_remove retval to void
This avoids handling gpiochip remove error in device
remove handler.
Signed-off-by: abdoulaye berthe
---
drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 24 +++-
include/linux/gpio/driver.h | 2 +-
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
index f48817d..022543f 100644
--- 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;
unsignedid;
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, >desc[id].flags)) {
- status = -EBUSY;
- break;
- }
- }
- if (status == 0) {
- for (id = 0; id < chip->ngpio; id++)
- chip->desc[id].chip = NULL;
-
- list_del(>list);
+ if (test_bit(FLAG_REQUESTED, >desc[id].flags))
+ panic("gpio: removing gpiochip with gpios still
requested\n");
}
+ for (id = 0; id < chip->ngpio; id++)
+ chip->desc[id].chip = NULL;
+ list_del(>list);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(_lock, flags);
-
- if (status == 0)
- gpiochip_unexport(chip);
-
- return status;
+ gpiochip_unexport(chip);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpiochip_remove);
diff --git a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
index 1827b43..72ed256 100644
--- a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
+++ b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
@@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ extern const char *gpiochip_is_requested(struct gpio_chip
*chip,
/* add/remove chips */
extern int gpiochip_add(struct gpio_chip *chip);
-extern int __must_check gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip);
+void gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip);
extern struct gpio_chip *gpiochip_find(void *data,
int (*match)(struct gpio_chip *chip, void *data));
--
1.8.3.2
--
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/
[PATCH] gpio: gpiolib: set gpiochip_remove retval to void
This avoids handling gpiochip remove error in device
remove handler.
Signed-off-by: abdoulaye berthe berthe...@gmail.com
---
drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 24 +++-
include/linux/gpio/driver.h | 2 +-
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
index f48817d..022543f 100644
--- 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;
unsignedid;
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);
}
+ for (id = 0; id chip-ngpio; id++)
+ chip-desc[id].chip = NULL;
+ list_del(chip-list);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(gpio_lock, flags);
-
- if (status == 0)
- gpiochip_unexport(chip);
-
- return status;
+ gpiochip_unexport(chip);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpiochip_remove);
diff --git a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
index 1827b43..72ed256 100644
--- a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
+++ b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
@@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ extern const char *gpiochip_is_requested(struct gpio_chip
*chip,
/* add/remove chips */
extern int gpiochip_add(struct gpio_chip *chip);
-extern int __must_check gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip);
+void gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip);
extern struct gpio_chip *gpiochip_find(void *data,
int (*match)(struct gpio_chip *chip, void *data));
--
1.8.3.2
--
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/
Re: [PATCH] gpio: gpiolib: set gpiochip_remove retval to void
Hi abdoulaye, On Fri, 30 May 2014 00:32:02 +0200 abdoulaye berthe berthe...@gmail.com wrote: + if (test_bit(FLAG_REQUESTED, chip-desc[id].flags)) + panic(gpio: removing gpiochip with gpios still requested\n); Someone else already commented that panic is probably overkill ... is there no way to log this and continue? -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwells...@canb.auug.org.au signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [PATCH] gpio: gpiolib: set gpiochip_remove retval to void
On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 7:03 PM, abdoulaye berthe wrote:
> This avoids handling gpiochip remove error in device
> remove handler.
>
> Signed-off-by: abdoulaye berthe
In general this is the right thing to do.
> for (id = 0; id < chip->ngpio; id++) {
> - if (test_bit(FLAG_REQUESTED, >desc[id].flags)) {
> - status = -EBUSY;
> - break;
> - }
> - }
> - if (status == 0) {
> - for (id = 0; id < chip->ngpio; id++)
> - chip->desc[id].chip = NULL;
> -
> - list_del(>list);
> + if (test_bit(FLAG_REQUESTED, >desc[id].flags))
> + panic("gpiolib.c: gpiochip is still requested\n");
panic("gpio: removing gpiochip with gpios still requested\");
is more helpful.
But I want a patch that also removes *ALL* users of the return value
from this function in the *same* patch to avoid bisectability issues.
$ git grep gpiochip_remove
Then fix all of them or use coccinelle.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
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/
Re: [PATCH] gpio: gpiolib: set gpiochip_remove retval to void
On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 7:03 PM, abdoulaye berthe berthe...@gmail.com wrote:
This avoids handling gpiochip remove error in device
remove handler.
Signed-off-by: abdoulaye berthe berthe...@gmail.com
In general this is the right thing to do.
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(gpiolib.c: gpiochip is still requested\n);
panic(gpio: removing gpiochip with gpios still requested\);
is more helpful.
But I want a patch that also removes *ALL* users of the return value
from this function in the *same* patch to avoid bisectability issues.
$ git grep gpiochip_remove
Then fix all of them or use coccinelle.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
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/
Re: [PATCH] gpio: gpiolib: set gpiochip_remove retval to void
On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 1:40 AM, abdoulaye berthe wrote:
> Well, ignoring the return value as it is done in gpio-bt8xx makes the
> compiler complain and display a warning message. The problem with
> false warning is that it might distract you.
Isn't the warning due to the __must_check in the function's
declaration? If so just removing it might do the trick...
> I think that the patch
> will makes things consistent once completed
Yeah fundamentally speaking I am not against this patch - I just
wonder if it is worth going through all the call sites and changing
them. Also we cannot exclude that a few users actually make something
meaningful with the return value (don't know what that would be
though).
> Thanks a lot for the review.
>
> On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
>> On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 2:12 AM, abdoulaye berthe
>> wrote:
>>> This avoids handling gpiochip remove error in device
>>> remove handler.
>>
>> Be aware that at the moment many callers of gpiochip_remove() read its
>> return value. So applying your patch as-is would break compilation.
>>
>> This patch should therefore be the last of a series that first
>> modifies all callers of gpiochip_remove() to ignore its return value,
>> then neutralizes the function itself.
>>
>> I am not sure whether the world would really be a better place after
>> this though. Callers that don't need the return value of
>> gpiochip_remove() can simply ignore it...
>>
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: abdoulaye berthe
>>> ---
>>> drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 24 +++-
>>> include/linux/gpio/driver.h | 2 +-
>>> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
>>> index f48817d..4878980 100644
>>> --- 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;
>>> unsignedid;
>>>
>>> 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, >desc[id].flags)) {
>>> - status = -EBUSY;
>>> - break;
>>> - }
>>> - }
>>> - if (status == 0) {
>>> - for (id = 0; id < chip->ngpio; id++)
>>> - chip->desc[id].chip = NULL;
>>> -
>>> - list_del(>list);
>>> + if (test_bit(FLAG_REQUESTED, >desc[id].flags))
>>> + panic("gpiolib.c: gpiochip is still requested\n");
>>
>> panic() sounds a little harsh here. Maybe a dev_err() would be enough?
>>
>>> }
>>> + for (id = 0; id < chip->ngpio; id++)
>>> + chip->desc[id].chip = NULL;
>>>
>>> + list_del(>list);
>>> spin_unlock_irqrestore(_lock, flags);
>>> -
>>> - if (status == 0)
>>> - gpiochip_unexport(chip);
>>> -
>>> - return status;
>>> + gpiochip_unexport(chip);
>>> }
>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpiochip_remove);
>>>
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
>>> index 1827b43..72ed256 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
>>> @@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ extern const char *gpiochip_is_requested(struct
>>> gpio_chip *chip,
>>>
>>> /* add/remove chips */
>>> extern int gpiochip_add(struct gpio_chip *chip);
>>> -extern int __must_check gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip);
>>> +void gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip);
>>
>> "extern" should be preserved here for style consistency.
--
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/
Re: [PATCH] gpio: gpiolib: set gpiochip_remove retval to void
Well, ignoring the return value as it is done in gpio-bt8xx makes the
compiler complain and display a warning message. The problem with
false warning is that it might distract you. I think that the patch
will makes things consistent once completed
Thanks a lot for the review.
On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 2:12 AM, abdoulaye berthe wrote:
>> This avoids handling gpiochip remove error in device
>> remove handler.
>
> Be aware that at the moment many callers of gpiochip_remove() read its
> return value. So applying your patch as-is would break compilation.
>
> This patch should therefore be the last of a series that first
> modifies all callers of gpiochip_remove() to ignore its return value,
> then neutralizes the function itself.
>
> I am not sure whether the world would really be a better place after
> this though. Callers that don't need the return value of
> gpiochip_remove() can simply ignore it...
>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: abdoulaye berthe
>> ---
>> drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 24 +++-
>> include/linux/gpio/driver.h | 2 +-
>> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
>> index f48817d..4878980 100644
>> --- 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;
>> unsignedid;
>>
>> 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, >desc[id].flags)) {
>> - status = -EBUSY;
>> - break;
>> - }
>> - }
>> - if (status == 0) {
>> - for (id = 0; id < chip->ngpio; id++)
>> - chip->desc[id].chip = NULL;
>> -
>> - list_del(>list);
>> + if (test_bit(FLAG_REQUESTED, >desc[id].flags))
>> + panic("gpiolib.c: gpiochip is still requested\n");
>
> panic() sounds a little harsh here. Maybe a dev_err() would be enough?
>
>> }
>> + for (id = 0; id < chip->ngpio; id++)
>> + chip->desc[id].chip = NULL;
>>
>> + list_del(>list);
>> spin_unlock_irqrestore(_lock, flags);
>> -
>> - if (status == 0)
>> - gpiochip_unexport(chip);
>> -
>> - return status;
>> + gpiochip_unexport(chip);
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpiochip_remove);
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
>> index 1827b43..72ed256 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
>> @@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ extern const char *gpiochip_is_requested(struct
>> gpio_chip *chip,
>>
>> /* add/remove chips */
>> extern int gpiochip_add(struct gpio_chip *chip);
>> -extern int __must_check gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip);
>> +void gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip);
>
> "extern" should be preserved here for style consistency.
--
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/
Re: [PATCH] gpio: gpiolib: set gpiochip_remove retval to void
On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 2:12 AM, abdoulaye berthe wrote:
> This avoids handling gpiochip remove error in device
> remove handler.
Be aware that at the moment many callers of gpiochip_remove() read its
return value. So applying your patch as-is would break compilation.
This patch should therefore be the last of a series that first
modifies all callers of gpiochip_remove() to ignore its return value,
then neutralizes the function itself.
I am not sure whether the world would really be a better place after
this though. Callers that don't need the return value of
gpiochip_remove() can simply ignore it...
>
> Signed-off-by: abdoulaye berthe
> ---
> drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 24 +++-
> include/linux/gpio/driver.h | 2 +-
> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> index f48817d..4878980 100644
> --- 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;
> unsignedid;
>
> 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, >desc[id].flags)) {
> - status = -EBUSY;
> - break;
> - }
> - }
> - if (status == 0) {
> - for (id = 0; id < chip->ngpio; id++)
> - chip->desc[id].chip = NULL;
> -
> - list_del(>list);
> + if (test_bit(FLAG_REQUESTED, >desc[id].flags))
> + panic("gpiolib.c: gpiochip is still requested\n");
panic() sounds a little harsh here. Maybe a dev_err() would be enough?
> }
> + for (id = 0; id < chip->ngpio; id++)
> + chip->desc[id].chip = NULL;
>
> + list_del(>list);
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(_lock, flags);
> -
> - if (status == 0)
> - gpiochip_unexport(chip);
> -
> - return status;
> + gpiochip_unexport(chip);
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpiochip_remove);
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
> index 1827b43..72ed256 100644
> --- a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
> +++ b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
> @@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ extern const char *gpiochip_is_requested(struct gpio_chip
> *chip,
>
> /* add/remove chips */
> extern int gpiochip_add(struct gpio_chip *chip);
> -extern int __must_check gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip);
> +void gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip);
"extern" should be preserved here for style consistency.
--
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/
Re: [PATCH] gpio: gpiolib: set gpiochip_remove retval to void
On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 2:12 AM, abdoulaye berthe berthe...@gmail.com wrote:
This avoids handling gpiochip remove error in device
remove handler.
Be aware that at the moment many callers of gpiochip_remove() read its
return value. So applying your patch as-is would break compilation.
This patch should therefore be the last of a series that first
modifies all callers of gpiochip_remove() to ignore its return value,
then neutralizes the function itself.
I am not sure whether the world would really be a better place after
this though. Callers that don't need the return value of
gpiochip_remove() can simply ignore it...
Signed-off-by: abdoulaye berthe berthe...@gmail.com
---
drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 24 +++-
include/linux/gpio/driver.h | 2 +-
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
index f48817d..4878980 100644
--- 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;
unsignedid;
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(gpiolib.c: gpiochip is still requested\n);
panic() sounds a little harsh here. Maybe a dev_err() would be enough?
}
+ for (id = 0; id chip-ngpio; id++)
+ chip-desc[id].chip = NULL;
+ list_del(chip-list);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(gpio_lock, flags);
-
- if (status == 0)
- gpiochip_unexport(chip);
-
- return status;
+ gpiochip_unexport(chip);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpiochip_remove);
diff --git a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
index 1827b43..72ed256 100644
--- a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
+++ b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
@@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ extern const char *gpiochip_is_requested(struct gpio_chip
*chip,
/* add/remove chips */
extern int gpiochip_add(struct gpio_chip *chip);
-extern int __must_check gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip);
+void gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip);
extern should be preserved here for style consistency.
--
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/
Re: [PATCH] gpio: gpiolib: set gpiochip_remove retval to void
Well, ignoring the return value as it is done in gpio-bt8xx makes the
compiler complain and display a warning message. The problem with
false warning is that it might distract you. I think that the patch
will makes things consistent once completed
Thanks a lot for the review.
On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Alexandre Courbot gnu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 2:12 AM, abdoulaye berthe berthe...@gmail.com wrote:
This avoids handling gpiochip remove error in device
remove handler.
Be aware that at the moment many callers of gpiochip_remove() read its
return value. So applying your patch as-is would break compilation.
This patch should therefore be the last of a series that first
modifies all callers of gpiochip_remove() to ignore its return value,
then neutralizes the function itself.
I am not sure whether the world would really be a better place after
this though. Callers that don't need the return value of
gpiochip_remove() can simply ignore it...
Signed-off-by: abdoulaye berthe berthe...@gmail.com
---
drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 24 +++-
include/linux/gpio/driver.h | 2 +-
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
index f48817d..4878980 100644
--- 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;
unsignedid;
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(gpiolib.c: gpiochip is still requested\n);
panic() sounds a little harsh here. Maybe a dev_err() would be enough?
}
+ for (id = 0; id chip-ngpio; id++)
+ chip-desc[id].chip = NULL;
+ list_del(chip-list);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(gpio_lock, flags);
-
- if (status == 0)
- gpiochip_unexport(chip);
-
- return status;
+ gpiochip_unexport(chip);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpiochip_remove);
diff --git a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
index 1827b43..72ed256 100644
--- a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
+++ b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
@@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ extern const char *gpiochip_is_requested(struct
gpio_chip *chip,
/* add/remove chips */
extern int gpiochip_add(struct gpio_chip *chip);
-extern int __must_check gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip);
+void gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip);
extern should be preserved here for style consistency.
--
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/
Re: [PATCH] gpio: gpiolib: set gpiochip_remove retval to void
On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 1:40 AM, abdoulaye berthe berthe...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, ignoring the return value as it is done in gpio-bt8xx makes the
compiler complain and display a warning message. The problem with
false warning is that it might distract you.
Isn't the warning due to the __must_check in the function's
declaration? If so just removing it might do the trick...
I think that the patch
will makes things consistent once completed
Yeah fundamentally speaking I am not against this patch - I just
wonder if it is worth going through all the call sites and changing
them. Also we cannot exclude that a few users actually make something
meaningful with the return value (don't know what that would be
though).
Thanks a lot for the review.
On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Alexandre Courbot gnu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 2:12 AM, abdoulaye berthe berthe...@gmail.com
wrote:
This avoids handling gpiochip remove error in device
remove handler.
Be aware that at the moment many callers of gpiochip_remove() read its
return value. So applying your patch as-is would break compilation.
This patch should therefore be the last of a series that first
modifies all callers of gpiochip_remove() to ignore its return value,
then neutralizes the function itself.
I am not sure whether the world would really be a better place after
this though. Callers that don't need the return value of
gpiochip_remove() can simply ignore it...
Signed-off-by: abdoulaye berthe berthe...@gmail.com
---
drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 24 +++-
include/linux/gpio/driver.h | 2 +-
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
index f48817d..4878980 100644
--- 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;
unsignedid;
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(gpiolib.c: gpiochip is still requested\n);
panic() sounds a little harsh here. Maybe a dev_err() would be enough?
}
+ for (id = 0; id chip-ngpio; id++)
+ chip-desc[id].chip = NULL;
+ list_del(chip-list);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(gpio_lock, flags);
-
- if (status == 0)
- gpiochip_unexport(chip);
-
- return status;
+ gpiochip_unexport(chip);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpiochip_remove);
diff --git a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
index 1827b43..72ed256 100644
--- a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
+++ b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
@@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ extern const char *gpiochip_is_requested(struct
gpio_chip *chip,
/* add/remove chips */
extern int gpiochip_add(struct gpio_chip *chip);
-extern int __must_check gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip);
+void gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip);
extern should be preserved here for style consistency.
--
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/
Re: [PATCH] gpio: gpiolib: set gpiochip_remove retval to void
If this step is ok I will continue by updating the codes that use it.
On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 7:12 PM, abdoulaye berthe wrote:
> This avoids handling gpiochip remove error in device
> remove handler.
>
> Signed-off-by: abdoulaye berthe
> ---
> drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 24 +++-
> include/linux/gpio/driver.h | 2 +-
> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> index f48817d..4878980 100644
> --- 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;
> unsignedid;
>
> 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, >desc[id].flags)) {
> - status = -EBUSY;
> - break;
> - }
> - }
> - if (status == 0) {
> - for (id = 0; id < chip->ngpio; id++)
> - chip->desc[id].chip = NULL;
> -
> - list_del(>list);
> + if (test_bit(FLAG_REQUESTED, >desc[id].flags))
> + panic("gpiolib.c: gpiochip is still requested\n");
> }
> + for (id = 0; id < chip->ngpio; id++)
> + chip->desc[id].chip = NULL;
>
> + list_del(>list);
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(_lock, flags);
> -
> - if (status == 0)
> - gpiochip_unexport(chip);
> -
> - return status;
> + gpiochip_unexport(chip);
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpiochip_remove);
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
> index 1827b43..72ed256 100644
> --- a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
> +++ b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
> @@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ extern const char *gpiochip_is_requested(struct gpio_chip
> *chip,
>
> /* add/remove chips */
> extern int gpiochip_add(struct gpio_chip *chip);
> -extern int __must_check gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip);
> +void gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip);
> extern struct gpio_chip *gpiochip_find(void *data,
> int (*match)(struct gpio_chip *chip, void
> *data));
>
> --
> 1.8.3.2
>
--
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/
[PATCH] gpio: gpiolib: set gpiochip_remove retval to void
This avoids handling gpiochip remove error in device
remove handler.
Signed-off-by: abdoulaye berthe
---
drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 24 +++-
include/linux/gpio/driver.h | 2 +-
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
index f48817d..4878980 100644
--- 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;
unsignedid;
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, >desc[id].flags)) {
- status = -EBUSY;
- break;
- }
- }
- if (status == 0) {
- for (id = 0; id < chip->ngpio; id++)
- chip->desc[id].chip = NULL;
-
- list_del(>list);
+ if (test_bit(FLAG_REQUESTED, >desc[id].flags))
+ panic("gpiolib.c: gpiochip is still requested\n");
}
+ for (id = 0; id < chip->ngpio; id++)
+ chip->desc[id].chip = NULL;
+ list_del(>list);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(_lock, flags);
-
- if (status == 0)
- gpiochip_unexport(chip);
-
- return status;
+ gpiochip_unexport(chip);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpiochip_remove);
diff --git a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
index 1827b43..72ed256 100644
--- a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
+++ b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
@@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ extern const char *gpiochip_is_requested(struct gpio_chip
*chip,
/* add/remove chips */
extern int gpiochip_add(struct gpio_chip *chip);
-extern int __must_check gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip);
+void gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip);
extern struct gpio_chip *gpiochip_find(void *data,
int (*match)(struct gpio_chip *chip, void *data));
--
1.8.3.2
--
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/
[PATCH] gpio: gpiolib: set gpiochip_remove retval to void
This avoids handling gpiochip remove error in device
remove handler.
Signed-off-by: abdoulaye berthe
---
drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 24 +++-
include/linux/gpio/driver.h | 2 +-
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
index f48817d..4878980 100644
--- 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;
unsignedid;
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, >desc[id].flags)) {
- status = -EBUSY;
- break;
- }
- }
- if (status == 0) {
- for (id = 0; id < chip->ngpio; id++)
- chip->desc[id].chip = NULL;
-
- list_del(>list);
+ if (test_bit(FLAG_REQUESTED, >desc[id].flags))
+ panic("gpiolib.c: gpiochip is still requested\n");
}
+ for (id = 0; id < chip->ngpio; id++)
+ chip->desc[id].chip = NULL;
+ list_del(>list);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(_lock, flags);
-
- if (status == 0)
- gpiochip_unexport(chip);
-
- return status;
+ gpiochip_unexport(chip);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpiochip_remove);
diff --git a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
index 1827b43..72ed256 100644
--- a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
+++ b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
@@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ extern const char *gpiochip_is_requested(struct gpio_chip
*chip,
/* add/remove chips */
extern int gpiochip_add(struct gpio_chip *chip);
-extern int __must_check gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip);
+void gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip);
extern struct gpio_chip *gpiochip_find(void *data,
int (*match)(struct gpio_chip *chip, void *data));
--
1.8.3.2
--
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/
[PATCH] gpio: gpiolib: set gpiochip_remove retval to void
This avoids handling gpiochip remove error in device
remove handler.
Signed-off-by: abdoulaye berthe berthe...@gmail.com
---
drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 24 +++-
include/linux/gpio/driver.h | 2 +-
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
index f48817d..4878980 100644
--- 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;
unsignedid;
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(gpiolib.c: gpiochip is still requested\n);
}
+ for (id = 0; id chip-ngpio; id++)
+ chip-desc[id].chip = NULL;
+ list_del(chip-list);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(gpio_lock, flags);
-
- if (status == 0)
- gpiochip_unexport(chip);
-
- return status;
+ gpiochip_unexport(chip);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpiochip_remove);
diff --git a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
index 1827b43..72ed256 100644
--- a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
+++ b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
@@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ extern const char *gpiochip_is_requested(struct gpio_chip
*chip,
/* add/remove chips */
extern int gpiochip_add(struct gpio_chip *chip);
-extern int __must_check gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip);
+void gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip);
extern struct gpio_chip *gpiochip_find(void *data,
int (*match)(struct gpio_chip *chip, void *data));
--
1.8.3.2
--
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/
[PATCH] gpio: gpiolib: set gpiochip_remove retval to void
This avoids handling gpiochip remove error in device
remove handler.
Signed-off-by: abdoulaye berthe berthe...@gmail.com
---
drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 24 +++-
include/linux/gpio/driver.h | 2 +-
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
index f48817d..4878980 100644
--- 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;
unsignedid;
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(gpiolib.c: gpiochip is still requested\n);
}
+ for (id = 0; id chip-ngpio; id++)
+ chip-desc[id].chip = NULL;
+ list_del(chip-list);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(gpio_lock, flags);
-
- if (status == 0)
- gpiochip_unexport(chip);
-
- return status;
+ gpiochip_unexport(chip);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpiochip_remove);
diff --git a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
index 1827b43..72ed256 100644
--- a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
+++ b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
@@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ extern const char *gpiochip_is_requested(struct gpio_chip
*chip,
/* add/remove chips */
extern int gpiochip_add(struct gpio_chip *chip);
-extern int __must_check gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip);
+void gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip);
extern struct gpio_chip *gpiochip_find(void *data,
int (*match)(struct gpio_chip *chip, void *data));
--
1.8.3.2
--
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/
Re: [PATCH] gpio: gpiolib: set gpiochip_remove retval to void
If this step is ok I will continue by updating the codes that use it.
On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 7:12 PM, abdoulaye berthe berthe...@gmail.com wrote:
This avoids handling gpiochip remove error in device
remove handler.
Signed-off-by: abdoulaye berthe berthe...@gmail.com
---
drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 24 +++-
include/linux/gpio/driver.h | 2 +-
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
index f48817d..4878980 100644
--- 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;
unsignedid;
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(gpiolib.c: gpiochip is still requested\n);
}
+ for (id = 0; id chip-ngpio; id++)
+ chip-desc[id].chip = NULL;
+ list_del(chip-list);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(gpio_lock, flags);
-
- if (status == 0)
- gpiochip_unexport(chip);
-
- return status;
+ gpiochip_unexport(chip);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpiochip_remove);
diff --git a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
index 1827b43..72ed256 100644
--- a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
+++ b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
@@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ extern const char *gpiochip_is_requested(struct gpio_chip
*chip,
/* add/remove chips */
extern int gpiochip_add(struct gpio_chip *chip);
-extern int __must_check gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip);
+void gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip);
extern struct gpio_chip *gpiochip_find(void *data,
int (*match)(struct gpio_chip *chip, void
*data));
--
1.8.3.2
--
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/
