gpio: gpio-bt8xx: fix compilation warning
Subsystems (2)
PATCH 1/1 gpio: gpio-bt8xx: fix compilation warning
this fixes a compilation warning by checking
the retun value of gpiochip_remove()
--- drivers/gpio/gpio-bt8xx.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
drivers/gpio/gpio-bt8xx.c +2 -1
@@ -240,7 +240,8 @@ static void bt8xxgpio_remove(struct pci_dev *pdev) {struct bt8xxgpio *bg =pci_get_drvdata (pdev); -gpiochip_remove (&bg->gpio); +if (gpiochip_remove (&bg->gpio)) +dev_info (&pdev->dev,"gpiochip_remove() failed.\n" );bgwrite (0 ,BT848_INT_MASK );bgwrite (~0x0 ,BT848_INT_STAT );
Signature · 1 line
1.8.3.2
Michael Büsch
maintainerQuoted 2 lines · On Wed, 14 May 2014 23:43:36 +0200 abdoulaye berthe <[email protected]> wrote:
this fixes a compilation warning by checking
the retun value ofgpiochip_remove()
Really, I would rather change the gpiochip_remove return type to void.
What is the point of printing a useless error message in case
of a failure and then continuing as always.
This is not fixing a compiler warning, it is a workaround. And a bad one, indeed.
How are we supposed to handle a gpiochip_remove failure correctly in a pcidev remove handler?
Quoted 19 lines
Signed-off-by abdoulaye berthe <[email protected]>--- drivers/gpio/gpio-bt8xx.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)drivers/gpio/gpio-bt8xx.c +2
-1@@ -240,7 +240,8 @@ static void bt8xxgpio_remove(struct pci_dev *pdev) {struct bt8xxgpio *bg =pci_get_drvdata (pdev); -gpiochip_remove (&bg->gpio); +if (gpiochip_remove (&bg->gpio)) +dev_info (&pdev->dev,"gpiochip_remove() failed.\n" );bgwrite (0 ,BT848_INT_MASK );bgwrite (~0x0 ,BT848_INT_STAT );
Signature · 6 lines
Michael. ---- Please use PGP/GPG encryption. Key-ID: F532BE1D908D8B0E --------
Quoted 8 lines · Michael Büsch
Quoted 2 lines · On Wed, 14 May 2014 23:43:36 +0200 abdoulaye berthe <[email protected]> wrote:
this fixes a compilation warning by checking
the retun value ofgpiochip_remove()Really, I would rather change the
gpiochip_removereturn type to void.
Good point.
Dropping this patch in favor of real solution.
Yours,
Linus Walleij