On Wed, 12 Feb 2025, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 9:59 AM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > While it now returns void, it will soon be converted to return an > > integer instead. Don't do `return gpiod_set...`. > > > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx> > > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202502121512.CmoMg9Q7-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/ > > Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/leds/leds-aw200xx.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/leds/leds-aw200xx.c b/drivers/leds/leds-aw200xx.c > > index 08cca128458c..fe223d363a5d 100644 > > --- a/drivers/leds/leds-aw200xx.c > > +++ b/drivers/leds/leds-aw200xx.c > > @@ -379,7 +379,7 @@ static void aw200xx_enable(const struct aw200xx *const chip) > > > > static void aw200xx_disable(const struct aw200xx *const chip) > > { > > - return gpiod_set_value_cansleep(chip->hwen, 0); > > + gpiod_set_value_cansleep(chip->hwen, 0); > > } > > > > static int aw200xx_probe_get_display_rows(struct device *dev, > > -- > > 2.45.2 > > > > Lee, Pavel: > > If this is OK for you, can you please provide me with an immutable > branch so that I can pull it into the GPIO tree? It seems it's the > only such use-case in the tree apart from the gpio.h header that I can > fix locally. Alternatively you can just Ack this and let me take it > through the GPIO tree. I'm okay with it, but why do you need it? -- Lee Jones [李琼斯]
