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

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

On Jul 10,  9:37pm, David Holland wrote:
} On Sat, Jul 09, 2016 at 08:45:15PM -0700, John Nemeth wrote:
}  > } 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.
} 
} Well, yes, but if you change the return type mechanically first then
} you end up with a thousand or two attach functions that *look* like
} they handle errors but actually don't.

     Thanks for the reminder.  I meant to add to my list of steps
that the xxx_attach() function needs to be flagged somehow (possibly
with a standardised comment) to show that it still needs to be
audited.  The flag is something that needs to be easily found
mechanically so that lists can be made.

     Also, I expect that some drivers will never be audited/tested
since there are drivers for ancient hardware that very few people
now own/use.  Of course, that might be a hint that the driver should
be retired (or, at least commented out in GENERIC).

}-- End of excerpt from David Holland