Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933617AbXEOJR2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 May 2007 05:17:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759220AbXEOJRW (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 May 2007 05:17:22 -0400 Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:45484 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758423AbXEOJRV (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 May 2007 05:17:21 -0400 Message-ID: <46497A9D.7000905@garzik.org> Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 05:17:17 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070302) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stephen Rothwell CC: LKML Subject: Re: __must_check (stir the pot :-)) References: <20070515173146.505952d1.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> In-Reply-To: <20070515173146.505952d1.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -4.3 (----) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 3.1.8 on srv5.dvmed.net summary: Content analysis details: (-4.3 points, 5.0 required) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 586 Lines: 19 Stephen Rothwell wrote: > where sysfs_create_file() is marked __must_check and sysdev_create_file() > isn't. > > So the questions come to mind: Do we really care if our core > infrastructure doesn't? Can we care if the core infrastructure doesn't > propogate the error returns? Yes, we should propagate the markers as needed... Jeff - 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/