On Fri, 2006-10-06 at 22:18 +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote: > >> - (void) kmem_cache_destroy(cache); > >> + kmem_cache_destroy(cache); > >> > >> I believe that the point of the (void) is to prevent lint from > >> squawking, and perhaps some picky ANSI-C compilers. What is the overall > >> Linux policy on this? > > > >IMHO there's another reason to do this which is much more relevant: it > >tells the reader that whoever wrote it knows that it returns a value > >and ignores it on purpose. > > And GCC does not care about that, i.e. it still prints foritfy warnings, > as in: > > $ svn co https://svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/ttyrpld/trunk a && cd a > $ make user/rpld.o EXT_CFLAGS="-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2" > user/rpld.c:425: warning: ignoring return value of ‘write’, declared > with attribute warn_unused_result this is by design. __must_check means you MUST do it. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
