Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 23:00:38 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 23:00:38 -0500 Received: from dp.samba.org ([66.70.73.150]:55489 "EHLO lists.samba.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 23:00:34 -0500 From: Rusty Russell To: John Levon Cc: oprofile-list@lists.sf.net, torvalds@transmeta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Module load notification take 3 In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 25 Mar 2003 11:41:52 -0000." <20030325114152.GB30581@compsoc.man.ac.uk> Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 13:20:23 +1100 Message-Id: <20030327041148.0A4A12C054@lists.samba.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1124 Lines: 31 In message <20030325114152.GB30581@compsoc.man.ac.uk> you write: > On Tue, Mar 25, 2003 at 05:32:33PM +1100, Rusty Russell wrote: > > > > Implement a module load notifier for the benefit of OProfile, tested > > > with .66 on UP. > > > > Minor change to make unregister_module_notifier return void. > > The -ENOENT return is there for a reason. What reason? I just grepped 2.5.66-bk2, and *noone* uses the return value, not even to BUG() (you have to grep for all the wrappers for notifier_call_unregister, too). That's because everyone realizes that the return value is useless. > If you don't want it, then you should remove it from > notifier_call_register too. (I assume you mean notifier_call_unregister). Yes, but that's another battle. Meanwhile, at least I'm not adding to the problem. Rusty. -- Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell. - 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/