Messages in this thread | | | From | Axel Kittenberger <> | Subject | Re: Patch, forward release() return values to the close() call | Date | Tue, 26 Mar 2002 09:52:08 +0100 |
| |
> Agreed, but the question is which approach to use. :) Declaring it as void > sounds like it may involve a lot of driver fixup work.
For the first way of doing I already provided a patch, which started this thread. (returning the release() value proparly to the close())
However if I get a word from the applicate maintaners (linus or viro) that a patch declaring release() with void return type will be accepted for 2.5.x, I would volunteer for providing it. Should not be that much of a work, once you concentrate on it. However I'm not doing it for the birds :o) (without consultation first).
Personlaly I'm unsure which of both decisions would be better, but am unsatisfied with the way it's currently. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |