2 Jul
2013
2 Jul
'13
3:47 a.m.
On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 5:22 AM, Daniel Vetter daniel@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@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@ffwll.ch
Thanks, I've stuck this in -next as it looks like a nice cleanup I'd like now.
Dave.