On Sat, 10 Sep 2005, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Sep 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > In other words, there's nothing you can or should do about it. Testing the
> > return value is pointless. And thus adding a "must_check" is really really
> > wrong: it might make people do
> >
> > if (pci_set_power_state(pdev, 0))
> > return -ENODEV
> >
> > which is actually actively the _wrong_ thing to do, and would just cause
> > old revisions of the chip that might not support PM capabilities to no
> > longer work.
>
> Funny you should say this -- exactly that problem _did_ arise. See
>
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-pci&m=112621842604724&w=2
>
> pci_enable_device_bars() would an error when trying to initialize
> devices without PM support, because it started checking the return value
> from pci_set_power_state().
Case closed.
Bogus warnings are a _bad_ thing. They cause people to write buggy code.
That drivers/pci/pci.c code should be simplified to not look at the error
return from pci_set_power_state() at all. Special-casing EIO is just
another bug waiting to happen.
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |