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;
From:   Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 1 Feb 2020 10:08:04 +0900
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/6] console: Introduce ->exit() callback
Message-ID: <20200201010804.GB1352@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain>
References: <20200130152558.51839-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
 <20200130152558.51839-5-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
 <20200131013154.GH115889@google.com>
 <20200131112724.GM32742@smile.fi.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200131112724.GM32742@smile.fi.intel.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On (20/01/31 13:27), Andy Shevchenko wrote:
[..]
> > 
> > I would probably push it a bit further (I posted this snippet in another
> > thread). If console is not on the list then there is nothing for us to do
> > and sysfs notify is pointless.
> 
> I didn't see post in the other thread, but I suppose that this snipped is
> for patch 4 in the series, correct?

No worries! Yes, for v4.

[..]
> > -	if (!res && console->exit)
> > +	if (console->exit)
> 
> >  		console->exit(console);
> >  
> >  	return res;
> 
> ...then something like
> 
> 		return console->exit(console);
> 
> 	return 0;
> 
> ...or...
> 
> 		res = console->exit(console);
> 
> Which one is preferable?

I don't really have preferences here, so up to you guys.

	-ss