lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Mar]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: __setup return value
Date
Tim Waugh writes:
> On Tue, 21 Mar 2000, Tim Waugh wrote:
> > When is a driver supposed to return 0 from a __setup function? When
> > it can't parse the options? Or when there's a possibility that the
> > option is intended for another driver?
>
> No-one seems to want to answer this, or else everyone missed it.
>
> Is it worth me making a patch to change the behaviour of those drivers
> that return 0 on error (rather that when the option could be used by
> another driver) to return 1 instead?

Tim,

Alan sent me the ARM specific bits of your patch, which will be going into
Linus tree via myself. Thanks for pointing it out.
_____
|_____| ------------------------------------------------- ---+---+-
| | Russell King rmk@arm.linux.org.uk --- ---
| | | | http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/~rmk/aboutme.html / / |
| +-+-+ --- -+-
/ | THE developer of ARM Linux |+| /|\
/ | | | --- |
+-+-+ ------------------------------------------------- /\\\ |

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:57    [W:0.076 / U:0.048 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site