On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 11:33:30AM +0200, Quentin Schulz wrote: > Hi Tom, > > On 10/21/25 10:25 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > > With the addition of general text about how the return value is handled, > > reference that while retaining the additional information about setting > > $seama_image_size > > > > Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <[email protected]> > > --- > > Cc: Heinrich Schuchardt <[email protected]> > > --- > > doc/usage/cmd/seama.rst | 7 ++----- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/doc/usage/cmd/seama.rst b/doc/usage/cmd/seama.rst > > index 17fd559f4856..a6b00f32902e 100644 > > --- a/doc/usage/cmd/seama.rst > > +++ b/doc/usage/cmd/seama.rst > > @@ -56,8 +56,5 @@ The command is available if CONFIG_CMD_SEAMA=y. > > Return value > > ------------ > > -The return value $? is set 0 (true) if the loading is succefull, and > > -is set to 1 (false) in case of error. > > - > > -The environment variable $seama_image_size is set to the size of the > > -loaded SEAMA image. > > +Along with the general rules for setting $?, the environment variable > > +$seama_image_size is set to the size of the loaded SEAMA image. > > Maybe add "as reported by the SEAMA image header" as that seems to be what > is reported in this variable reading cmd/seama.c? > > Also wondering if this shouldn't be in a separate section like "Side > effects" since it isn't really the return value. I'm thinking > doc/usage/cmd/fatload.rst (and a few others) could benefit from something > like that to explain filesize env variable is set automatically.
Perhaps, but I would see all of that as future clean-ups, I'm just trying to get (most) everything consistent first. I say most because on reflection, I think a number of commands that say they only return 0 are just not mentioning invalid syntax, but verifying that is a more involved process (I did check a few commands that say the only ever return 0 and saw the normal CMD_RET_USAGE checks, so removed their incorrect text). -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
