On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 5:22 AM, Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 08:32:58PM +0200, David Herrmann wrote: >> There is no reason to return "int" as this function never fails. >> Furthermore, several drivers (ast, sis) already depend on this. >> >> Signed-off-by: David Herrmann <dh.herrmann at gmail.com> > > Back when I've reworked drm_mm I was still a rookie and didn't want to > touch all drivers, hence why I've left the int return type. Good riddance > to that! > > Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch>
Thanks, I've stuck this in -next as it looks like a nice cleanup I'd like now. Dave.
