linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] selftests: timers: freq-step: Fix build warning

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20170815121120.GB8800@localhost>
Date:   Tue, 15 Aug 2017 14:11:20 +0200
From:   Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@...hat.com>
To:     John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
Cc:     lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Shuah Khan <shuahkh@....samsung.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] selftests: timers: freq-step: Fix build warning

On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 02:01:36PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
> Fixes the following build warning:
> freq-step.c: In function ‘main’:
> freq-step.c:271:1: warning: control reaches end of non-void function [-Wreturn-type]

> @@ -268,4 +268,6 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
>  		ksft_exit_fail();
>  
>  	ksft_exit_pass();
> +
> +	return 0;
>  }

It seems most tests use "return ksft_exit_pass();". Would that be
preferred over separate return? I don't have a preference.

Both patches in this set look good to me.

Thanks,

-- 
Miroslav Lichvar