| Message ID | 1456235876-4088840-4-git-send-email-arnd@arndb.de (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
* Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> [160223 05:58]: > The modem pm handler in the ams-delta board uses regulator_enable() > but does not check for a successful return code: > > board-ams-delta.c:521:3: error: ignoring return value of 'regulator_enable', declared with attribute warn_unused_result [-Werror=unused-result] > > It is not easy to propagate that return code to the callers in > uart_configure_port/uart_suspend_port/uart_resume_port, unless > we change all UART drivers, and it is unclear what those would > do with the return code. > > Instead, this patch uses a runtime warning to replace the > compiletime warning. I have checked that the regulator in question > is hardcoded to a fixed-voltage GPIO regulator, and that should > never fail to get enabled if I understand the code right. Looks OK to me: Acked-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
> > It is not easy to propagate that return code to the callers in > > uart_configure_port/uart_suspend_port/uart_resume_port, unless > > we change all UART drivers, and it is unclear what those would > > do with the return code. > > > > Instead, this patch uses a runtime warning to replace the > > compiletime warning. I have checked that the regulator in question > > is hardcoded to a fixed-voltage GPIO regulator, and that should > > never fail to get enabled if I understand the code right. > > Looks OK to me: If it was a concern for a real driver I think I'd perform a hangup on the port at that moment. That's what happens if for example you hot unplug a serial port which would be approximately the same as finding out you can't power it back up. Alan
On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 02:57:53PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > The modem pm handler in the ams-delta board uses regulator_enable() > but does not check for a successful return code: > > board-ams-delta.c:521:3: error: ignoring return value of 'regulator_enable', declared with attribute warn_unused_result [-Werror=unused-result] > > It is not easy to propagate that return code to the callers in > uart_configure_port/uart_suspend_port/uart_resume_port, unless > we change all UART drivers, and it is unclear what those would > do with the return code. > > Instead, this patch uses a runtime warning to replace the > compiletime warning. I have checked that the regulator in question > is hardcoded to a fixed-voltage GPIO regulator, and that should > never fail to get enabled if I understand the code right. > > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> Acked-by: Aaro Koskinen <aaro.koskinen@iki.fi> A.
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap1/board-ams-delta.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap1/board-ams-delta.c index 6613a6ff5dbc..6cbc69c92913 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap1/board-ams-delta.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap1/board-ams-delta.c @@ -510,6 +510,7 @@ static void __init ams_delta_init(void) static void modem_pm(struct uart_port *port, unsigned int state, unsigned old) { struct modem_private_data *priv = port->private_data; + int ret; if (IS_ERR(priv->regulator)) return; @@ -518,9 +519,16 @@ static void modem_pm(struct uart_port *port, unsigned int state, unsigned old) return; if (state == 0) - regulator_enable(priv->regulator); + ret = regulator_enable(priv->regulator); else if (old == 0) - regulator_disable(priv->regulator); + ret = regulator_disable(priv->regulator); + else + ret = 0; + + if (ret) + dev_warn(port->dev, + "ams_delta modem_pm: failed to %sable regulator: %d\n", + state ? "dis" : "en", ret); } static struct plat_serial8250_port ams_delta_modem_ports[] = {
The modem pm handler in the ams-delta board uses regulator_enable() but does not check for a successful return code: board-ams-delta.c:521:3: error: ignoring return value of 'regulator_enable', declared with attribute warn_unused_result [-Werror=unused-result] It is not easy to propagate that return code to the callers in uart_configure_port/uart_suspend_port/uart_resume_port, unless we change all UART drivers, and it is unclear what those would do with the return code. Instead, this patch uses a runtime warning to replace the compiletime warning. I have checked that the regulator in question is hardcoded to a fixed-voltage GPIO regulator, and that should never fail to get enabled if I understand the code right. Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> --- arch/arm/mach-omap1/board-ams-delta.c | 12 ++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)