On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 05:43:52PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 04:38:26PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> > 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 user
On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 04:38:26PM +, 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 +, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > Given that all the rest of the function is doing is further debugfs
> > > operations and when it
On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 05:08:57PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 03:56:06PM +, 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 diagnostic
On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 03:56:06PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 04:21:06PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > When calling debugfs functions, there is no need to ever check the
> > return value. The function can work or not, but the code logic should
> > never do something
On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 04:21:06PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> When calling debugfs functions, there is no need to ever check the
> return value. The function can work or not, but the code logic should
> never do something different based on this.
Given that all the rest of the function is
When calling debugfs functions, there is no need to ever check the
return value. The function can work or not, but the code logic should
never do something different based on this.
Cc: Mark Brown
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki"
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman
---
drivers/base/regmap/regmap-debugfs.
6 matches
Mail list logo
