From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 036162C81 for ; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 16:42:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2574060238; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 16:42:33 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1635439353; bh=nhnhDs6r4p5EaPCqcbb6JFQVDxWedPO0J85OCd8/7nQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=m7N7VrJw7X062UMMNUg4E0GnT97i81zY9kp/kHyi0LO46U2eNQQhuGRtl2zO29SWj soUlHlKwEORzy2NB4RekAYP2K22Zb9mDka3JQRWkXcmnKmYdSOgoKQcGGnIPe8Ra0/ RVyEnaYEL6M7bo4NacBNZlSKOjLT1/Tr5cxJ6ljM= Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 18:42:31 +0200 From: Greg KH To: Senthu Sivarajah Cc: vaibhav.sr@gmail.com, greybus-dev@lists.linaro.org, linux-staging@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Staging: greybus: audio_codec: changed a void function to return 0 Message-ID: References: <20211028153808.9509-1-ssivaraj@stud.fra-uas.de> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-staging@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20211028153808.9509-1-ssivaraj@stud.fra-uas.de> On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 05:38:08PM +0200, Senthu Sivarajah wrote: > From: Senthuran Sivarajah > > Fixed a coding style issue. What coding style exactly? > > Signed-off-by: Senthuran Sivarajah > > --- > drivers/staging/greybus/audio_codec.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/greybus/audio_codec.c b/drivers/staging/greybus/audio_codec.c > index b589cf6b1d03..9f99862791dc 100644 > --- a/drivers/staging/greybus/audio_codec.c > +++ b/drivers/staging/greybus/audio_codec.c > @@ -1028,7 +1028,7 @@ static int gbcodec_probe(struct snd_soc_component *comp) > static void gbcodec_remove(struct snd_soc_component *comp) > { > /* Empty function for now */ > - return; > + return 0; Did you build this change? Exactly what tool reported a problem with this code and what was the exact error? thanks, greg k-h