[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140924072633.GA1768@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 09:26:33 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Matt Fleming <matt@...sole-pimps.org>
Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...onical.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@...el.com>,
Leif Lindholm <leif.lindholm@...aro.org>,
Roy Franz <roy.franz@...aro.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] x86 fixes
* Matt Fleming <matt@...sole-pimps.org> wrote:
> @@ -1394,10 +1394,7 @@ struct boot_params *efi_main(struct efi_config *c,
>
> setup_graphics(boot_params);
>
> - status = setup_efi_pci(boot_params);
> - if (status != EFI_SUCCESS) {
> - efi_printk(sys_table, "setup_efi_pci() failed!\n");
> - }
> + setup_efi_pci(boot_params);
>
> status = efi_call_early(allocate_pool, EFI_LOADER_DATA,
> sizeof(*gdt), (void **)&gdt);
So 'status' is unused - either use it for a less threatening
message, or remove the return code from the function and document
that failure is an option?
Thanks,
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists