[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2020 08:29:25 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@...sung.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] driver core: Annotate dev_err_probe() with __must_check
On Wed, 26 Aug 2020 at 18:18, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2020-08-26 at 18:55 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 08:44:30AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2020-08-26 at 13:44 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > > -int dev_err_probe(const struct device *dev, int err, const char *fmt, ...);
> > > > +int __must_check dev_err_probe(const struct device *dev, int err, const char *fmt, ...);
+Cc Stephen and Greg,
Hi Andy,
Did this patch ended up in next somehow? I am surprised because now I
got warnings for perfectly fine code:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-next/20200909155654.76fe3bd6@canb.auug.org.au/T/#u
This creates simply false warnings instead of hints for "optimization".
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists