On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 09:58:50PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Friday, January 11, 2013 10:37:59 PM Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 09:31:43PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com>
> > > Subject: ACPI / scan: Fix check of device_attach() return value.
> > >
> > > Since device_attach() returns 1 on success and 0 on failure,
> > > the check against its return value in acpi_bus_device_attach()
> > > should be reveresed. Make it so.
> >
> > Not sure if it matters but it returns 0 if no device was bound to a driver
> > and -ENODEV in case of error. If we only want to terminate in case of
> > error, following might be better.
> >
> > } else if (device_attach(&device->dev) < 0) {
>
> Yes, this check will be better.
>
> Which means that the patch is actually yours, so I've just added the
> changelog. :-)
>
Thanks! (and I've tested this, it works ;-))
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
