From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: dan.carpenter@oracle.com (Dan Carpenter) Date: Sun, 5 May 2013 17:18:55 +0300 Subject: [PATCH 4/4] staging: =?utf-8?Q?ste=5Fr?= =?utf-8?Q?mi4=3A_Suppress_'ignoring_return_value_of_=E2=80=98regulator=5F?= =?utf-8?B?ZW5hYmxlKCkn?= warning In-Reply-To: <20130503070713.GA27956@bnru09> References: <1367509690-24022-1-git-send-email-lee.jones@linaro.org> <1367509690-24022-5-git-send-email-lee.jones@linaro.org> <20130503070713.GA27956@bnru09> Message-ID: <20130505141855.GB4686@mwanda> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Fri, May 03, 2013 at 12:37:14PM +0530, Srinidhi Kasagar wrote: > On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 17:48:10 +0200, Lee Jones wrote: > > drivers/staging/ste_rmi4/synaptics_i2c_rmi4.c: > > In function ?synaptics_rmi4_resume?: > > drivers/staging/ste_rmi4/synaptics_i2c_rmi4.c:1090:18: > > warning: ignoring return value of ?regulator_enable?, declared > > with attribute warn_unused_result [-Wunused-result > > > > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman > > Cc: devel at driverdev.osuosl.org > > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones > > --- > > drivers/staging/ste_rmi4/synaptics_i2c_rmi4.c | 4 +++- > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/ste_rmi4/synaptics_i2c_rmi4.c b/drivers/staging/ste_rmi4/synaptics_i2c_rmi4.c > > index fe667dd..c4d013d 100644 > > --- a/drivers/staging/ste_rmi4/synaptics_i2c_rmi4.c > > +++ b/drivers/staging/ste_rmi4/synaptics_i2c_rmi4.c > > @@ -1087,7 +1087,9 @@ static int synaptics_rmi4_resume(struct device *dev) > > unsigned char intr_status; > > struct synaptics_rmi4_data *rmi4_data = dev_get_drvdata(dev); > > > > - regulator_enable(rmi4_data->regulator); > > + retval = regulator_enable(rmi4_data->regulator); > > + if (retval < 0) > > + return retval; > Does it make sense to add a dev_err? > Is that a question? regulator_enable() already prints some warnings. Probably it's not going to fail and adding code that is duplicative or will never be run is pointless. regards, dan carpenter