Re: Changing the return value of xxx_attach() from void to int.

[John Nemeth <jnemeth%cue.bc.ca@localhost>]

On Jul 10,  2:39am, David Holland wrote:
} On Sat, Jul 09, 2016 at 04:57:20PM -0700, John Nemeth wrote:
}  >      A number of people have expressed reservation (bring up memories
}  > of device_t and how long that took to settle out) indicating that
}  > this should be done on a branch or something.  Personally, I don't
}  > see the need to do so.  The issue with the device_t change was that
}  > it involved actual code changes.  This does not, it is simply search
}  > and replace, which is a much less dangerous thing to do.  Some have
}  > suggested doing other changes at the same time.  That would certainly
}  > increase the risk.
} 
} The substance of that reservation is that there's not much point doing
} it without also taking the time to correct the behavior, i.e., back
} out properly if something fails. And that requires attention, not just
} mechanical changes.

     Sure, but that's something that can be done over time, driver
by driver.  The first step is the infrastructure support (changing
the return type, having autoconf respond intelligently, etc.).
The very first step of changing the return type is a purely mechanical
change.

}-- End of excerpt from David Holland