[PATCH v2] drivers/gpio/gpio-sch311x: check return value of gpiochip_remove()

[PATCH v2] drivers/gpio/gpio-sch311x: check return value of gpiochip_remove()

[Varka Bhadram]

This patch eliminates the following warning

drivers/gpio/gpio-sch311x.c: In function ‘sch311x_gpio_probe’:
drivers/gpio/gpio-sch311x.c:286:18: warning: ignoring return value of ‘gpiochip_remove’, declared with attribute warn_unused_result

Signed-off-by: Varka Bhadram <varkab@cdac.in>
---
 drivers/gpio/gpio-sch311x.c |   11 ++++++++---
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-sch311x.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-sch311x.c
index f942b80..74282b9 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-sch311x.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-sch311x.c
@@ -232,7 +232,7 @@ static int sch311x_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 	struct sch311x_pdev_data *pdata = pdev->dev.platform_data;
 	struct sch311x_gpio_priv *priv;
 	struct sch311x_gpio_block *block;
-	int err, i;
+	int err, i, ret = 0;
 
 	/* we can register all GPIO data registers at once */
 	if (!request_region(pdata->runtime_reg + GP1, 6, DRV_NAME)) {
@@ -282,8 +282,13 @@ static int sch311x_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 exit_err:
 	release_region(pdata->runtime_reg + GP1, 6);
 	/* release already registered chips */
-	for (--i; i >= 0; i--)
-		gpiochip_remove(&priv->blocks[i].chip);
+	for (--i; i >= 0; i--) {
+		ret = gpiochip_remove(&priv->blocks[i].chip);
+
+		WARN(ret, "%s(): gpiochip_remove() failed, ret=%d\n",
+		     __func__, ret);
+	}
+
 	return err;
 }
 
-- 
1.7.9.5

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH v2] drivers/gpio/gpio-sch311x: check return value of gpiochip_remove()

[Alexandre Courbot]

On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 4:02 PM, Varka Bhadram <varkabhadram@gmail.com> wrote:
> This patch eliminates the following warning
>
> drivers/gpio/gpio-sch311x.c: In function ‘sch311x_gpio_probe’:
> drivers/gpio/gpio-sch311x.c:286:18: warning: ignoring return value of ‘gpiochip_remove’, declared with attribute warn_unused_result

gpiochip_remove() is to have its return value set to void in another
patch, so I'm not sure we need this one in the meantime?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH v2] drivers/gpio/gpio-sch311x: check return value of gpiochip_remove()

[Varka Bhadram]

Hi,

On Sunday 06 July 2014 02:52 PM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 4:02 PM, Varka Bhadram <varkabhadram@gmail.com> wrote:
>> This patch eliminates the following warning
>>
>> drivers/gpio/gpio-sch311x.c: In function ‘sch311x_gpio_probe’:
>> drivers/gpio/gpio-sch311x.c:286:18: warning: ignoring return value of ‘gpiochip_remove’, declared with attribute warn_unused_result
> gpiochip_remove() is to have its return value set to void in another
> patch, so I'm not sure we need this one in the meantime?

I also saw that patch from abdoulaye berthe<berthe.ab@gmail.com>  .

If that is accepted its good. If not this may require.

-- 
Regards,
Varka Bhadram

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH v2] drivers/gpio/gpio-sch311x: check return value of gpiochip_remove()

[Linus Walleij]

On Sun, Jul 6, 2014 at 3:23 PM, Varka Bhadram <varkabhadram@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday 06 July 2014 02:52 PM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 4:02 PM, Varka Bhadram <varkabhadram@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> This patch eliminates the following warning
>>>
>>> drivers/gpio/gpio-sch311x.c: In function ‘sch311x_gpio_probe’:
>>> drivers/gpio/gpio-sch311x.c:286:18: warning: ignoring return value of
>>> ‘gpiochip_remove’, declared with attribute warn_unused_result
>>
>> gpiochip_remove() is to have its return value set to void in another
>> patch, so I'm not sure we need this one in the meantime?
>
>
> I also saw that patch from abdoulaye berthe<berthe.ab@gmail.com>  .
>
> If that is accepted its good. If not this may require.

Yeah I'll go remove that. Just working out the patch mechanics right now,
we'll probably remove all return value checks in v3.17 and then delete
the code in gpiolib in late v3.17 cycle or the next merge window.

Yours,
Linus Walleij