On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 9:14 PM, Suman Anna <s-a...@ti.com> wrote: > On 02/07/2014 04:49 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote: >> It seems to be standard practice to pass the error value back to the >> consumer, so you should >> return ERR_PTR(ret); here instead of the NULL... > > > I have modelled the return values in this function based on the return > values in the existing hwspin_lock_request interfaces. I would need to > change those functions as well. > > Ohad, > Do you have any objections to the return code convention change?
Unless strictly needed, I prefer we don't switch to the ERR_PTR code convention, as it reduces code readability and increases chances of user bugs. In our case, switching to ERR_PTR and friends seems only to optimize a few error paths, and I'm not sure it's a big win over simplicity. Thanks, Ohad. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
