From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Subject: [PATCH v3 6/6] remove __must_check for res_counter_charge_nofail() Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 18:53:08 +0900 Message-ID: <4FACE184.6020307@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <4FACDED0.3020400@jp.fujitsu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4FACDED0.3020400-+CUm20s59erQFUHtdCDX3A@public.gmane.org> Sender: cgroups-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: "linux-mm-Bw31MaZKKs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org" Cc: "cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , Michal Hocko , Johannes Weiner , Frederic Weisbecker , Han Ying , Glauber Costa , Tejun Heo , "Aneesh Kumar K.V" , Andrew Morton , Hiroyuki Kamezawa , Linux Kernel I picked this up from Costa's slub memcg series. For fixing added warning by patch 4. == From: Glauber Costa Subject: [PATCH 6/6] remove __must_check for res_counter_charge_nofail() Since we will succeed with the allocation no matter what, there isn't the need to use __must_check with it. It can very well be optional. Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa Signed-off-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki --- include/linux/res_counter.h | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/linux/res_counter.h b/include/linux/res_counter.h index d11c1cd..c6b0368 100644 --- a/include/linux/res_counter.h +++ b/include/linux/res_counter.h @@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ int __must_check res_counter_charge_locked(struct res_counter *counter, unsigned long val); int __must_check res_counter_charge(struct res_counter *counter, unsigned long val, struct res_counter **limit_fail_at); -int __must_check res_counter_charge_nofail(struct res_counter *counter, +int res_counter_charge_nofail(struct res_counter *counter, unsigned long val, struct res_counter **limit_fail_at); /* -- 1.7.4.1