From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wm1-f43.google.com (mail-wm1-f43.google.com [209.85.128.43]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3711118038; Wed, 18 Oct 2023 09:34:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="kFtPETYT" Received: by mail-wm1-f43.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-4056ce55e7eso61838205e9.2; Wed, 18 Oct 2023 02:34:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1697621671; x=1698226471; darn=lists.linux.dev; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=sd04U5ztHM5BN91zVsx9G6ZDnJ4iPY9R76fpuMvI0tU=; b=kFtPETYTjM41JdVLhDLyUKkv6nKlTp4hVUpAWtyXDtY7JZrvtQwihkSRYCPG/7KWsI dtSqbEWyzxZvybE4AOj1FIZXYJjZ5YjFovnFyUrDhDvGxB8SVOkfo342t69E+VaUFNB7 dlydqoPHx/z+yj67RZiN81TtsbCCp9Oc54wYU+0vTytahjsq7tijWjE8eOo8bvcu0wun Av+HNPOJwj95x6kpgwYBwWFUme1R27a1JdJMFZYozjUYe5GcTG4nOhztm9EyIv+NWfUX TCNbrEIuaB711z1XUoB8o70kz5VreamjCFD7bs9/wplk9VY5rdiG4G+EaTPpEo7nVHlJ Ghiw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1697621671; x=1698226471; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=sd04U5ztHM5BN91zVsx9G6ZDnJ4iPY9R76fpuMvI0tU=; b=XsPdxJex5UDfcJz0V+NJ1cRlb3ZXxwhmVtssb1CoTEcLG1M/1TuX+1L9o3IE5TzB/k ZMXcxV0KtbI79Mp0/8vYluRJ6Q8lZTXsrhR8ob9qEG7UFSWmSpHo+DnrI3SsOdAb4g4o WQZkUUpzHIHlqVFoMTKk+82EOUkMxgqgwwv+WZAXlxPVlYFocy6IRpywHtyzHwC/Q+NH F/aozpxcja/JXfDLGSb6PjUgXaE7rfp5jo4Tuqbst2ejaDjQdxHRjrjbWiigRCUeWujd 4Uuo0Y+KgYqdu9mcwhjV8nARb3FsPdymOxZ9GEUyqhy4Ggp4rbNwdXylYyZTUXHrrG+U f5pA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yy4qEH7PYWa0ZVt46MOs7akpbke0bQ9KQxnAaDHK+WmZw6dd8KB LGkAc44+95iorx8W+xAX6Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHmDIpRPzXCLPQAZ3IxJiiTrLvL6xTrGXiKrnqsbiCJwNUaHu+nlvHbGSpKR4lJJDeUTV+Qjg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:5487:b0:408:3ab3:a050 with SMTP id iv7-20020a05600c548700b004083ab3a050mr1172995wmb.16.1697621670844; Wed, 18 Oct 2023 02:34:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dorcaslitunya-virtual-machine ([105.163.0.227]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k1-20020a5d66c1000000b0032dbf99bf4fsm1680829wrw.89.2023.10.18.02.34.28 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 18 Oct 2023 02:34:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2023 12:34:26 +0300 From: Dorcas Litunya To: Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: outreachy@lists.linux.dev, julia.lawall@inria.fr, dan.carpenter@linaro.org, andi.shyti@linux.intel.com, Sudip Mukherjee , Teddy Wang , linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-staging@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] staging: sm750fb: Remove unused return value in program_mode_registers() Message-ID: References: <492e63bbc58147fb534930ef9e1fb5d844ae8769.1697619623.git.anonolitunya@gmail.com> <2023101846-synopses-paralyses-d1ee@gregkh> 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: <2023101846-synopses-paralyses-d1ee@gregkh> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 11:26:33AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 12:07:38PM +0300, Dorcas AnonoLitunya wrote: > > Modifies the return type of program_mode_registers() > > to void from int as the return value is being ignored in > > all subsequent function calls. > > > > This improves code readability and maintainability. > > > > Suggested-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman > > Signed-off-by: Dorcas AnonoLitunya > > --- > > drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_mode.c | 5 ++--- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_mode.c b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_mode.c > > index 83ace6cc9583..e15039238232 100644 > > --- a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_mode.c > > +++ b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_mode.c > > @@ -73,8 +73,8 @@ display_control_adjust_sm750le(struct mode_parameter *mode_param, > > } > > > > /* only timing related registers will be programed */ > > -static int program_mode_registers(struct mode_parameter *mode_param, > > - struct pll_value *pll) > > +static void program_mode_registers(struct mode_parameter *mode_param, > > + struct pll_value *pll) > > { > > int ret = 0; > > int cnt = 0; > > @@ -202,7 +202,6 @@ static int program_mode_registers(struct mode_parameter *mode_param, > > } else { > > ret = -1; > > Why are you still setting the 'ret' variable if you are not doing > anything with it anymore? > > > } > > - return ret; > > Are you sure that the caller shouldn't be checking for errors instead of > dropping the return value? If so, document that in the changelog too. > Seems like the caller doesn't use the function to check for errors as in the code below: int ddk750_set_mode_timing(struct mode_parameter *parm, enum clock_type clock) { struct pll_value pll; pll.input_freq = DEFAULT_INPUT_CLOCK; pll.clock_type = clock; sm750_calc_pll_value(parm->pixel_clock, &pll); if (sm750_get_chip_type() == SM750LE) { /* set graphic mode via IO method */ outb_p(0x88, 0x3d4); outb_p(0x06, 0x3d5); } program_mode_registers(parm, &pll); return 0; It will still return 0 regardless of whether there is an error or not. Since I am not sure how the two functions relate to one another, is there need to check error in the caller function? thanks, Dorcas > thanks, > > greg k-h