Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1755763AbdIGTia (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Thu, 7 Sep 2017 15:38:30 -0400
Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:47518 "EHLO
        mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751456AbdIGTi2 (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 7 Sep 2017 15:38:28 -0400
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2017 21:37:32 +0200
From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@intel.com>
Cc: Anup Patel <anup.patel@broadcom.com>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
        Scott Branden <sbranden@broadcom.com>, Ray Jui <rjui@broadcom.com>,
        Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux ARM Kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        Device Tree <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, dmaengine@vger.kernel.org,
        BCM Kernel Feedback <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 15/16] dmaengine: bcm-sba-raid: Add debugfs support
Message-ID: <20170907193732.GB11006@kroah.com>
References: <1501583880-32072-1-git-send-email-anup.patel@broadcom.com>
 <1501583880-32072-16-git-send-email-anup.patel@broadcom.com>
 <20170817080142.GC3053@localhost>
 <CAALAos_SXTMms8XmhEC28gxx4qvvr0z3wqQ=o_-BohMpcXwQTw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20170818052613.GE3053@localhost>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20170818052613.GE3053@localhost>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.0 (2017-09-02)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 770
Lines: 21

On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 10:56:13AM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 10:33:54AM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 1:31 PM, Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@intel.com> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 01, 2017 at 04:07:59PM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:
> > > why fail, debugfs should be an optional thingy, why would you want to fail here?
> > 
> > Yes, we are handling the case when debugfs is not available
> > and skipping debugfs gracefully.
> > 
> > If debugfs is available then failure of debugfs_create_dir()
> > should be reported.
> 
> reported yes, bailing out on that err no..

Reported, no.  You should _never_ care about the return value of a
debugfs call.  Never check it, just move on ad keep on going.  It
doesn't matter.

thanks,

greg k-h