On Sun, 19 Jun 2011 21:22:11 +0200, Wolfram Sang <w.s...@pengutronix.de> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 04:47:53PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > > On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 08:15:57 -0700, Jesse Barnes <jbar...@virtuousgeek.org> > > wrote: > > > On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 15:28:46 +0200 > > > Wolfram Sang <w.s...@pengutronix.de> wrote: > > > > How about BUG_ON(!ptr) in the init-routine for a bit more grace? And/or > > > > a warning in the else-block? It seems to happen to users... > > > > > > Yeah, a BUG_ON would be fine. > > > > if (WARN_ON(!ptr, "no display vtable")) > > return -ENODEV; > > That would mean converting the involved void-functions to int to propagate the > error (intel_init_clock_gating, intel_modeset_init). Not a big deal, but quite > intrusive. Do you really mean that?
A choice between a BUG_ON and error propagation? Choose error propagation, one day it will be for real. ;-) -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
