Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Wed, 30 Jan 2019 20:33:48 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To:     Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Cc:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@kernel.org>,
        Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
        Peng Donglin <dolinux.peng@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] arm64: dump: no need to check return value of
 debugfs_create functions
Message-ID: <20190130193348.GC20667@kroah.com>
References: <20190122144114.9816-1-gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
 <20190122144114.9816-2-gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
 <20190130182102.GK18558@fuggles.cambridge.arm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190130182102.GK18558@fuggles.cambridge.arm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.2 (2019-01-07)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 06:21:02PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> 
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 03:41:11PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > When calling debugfs functions, there is no need to ever check the
> > return value.  The function can work or not, but the code logic should
> > never do something different based on this.
> > 
> > Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> > Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> > Cc: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
> > Cc: Peng Donglin <dolinux.peng@gmail.com>
> > Cc: <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
> > ---
> >  arch/arm64/include/asm/ptdump.h | 9 +++------
> >  arch/arm64/mm/dump.c            | 4 ++--
> >  arch/arm64/mm/ptdump_debugfs.c  | 7 ++-----
> >  3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> 
> Are you taking this via your tree, or would you like us to queue it in
> arm64?

What ever is easiest for you is fine with me, I can handle it either
way, just let me know.

thanks,

greg k-h