On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Peter Senna Tschudin <peter.senna@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hey Ezequiel, > > On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 1:02 AM, Ezequiel Garcia <elezegarcia@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Hey Peter, >> >> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 7:18 PM, Peter Senna Tschudin >> <peter.senna@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> - no_signal = stv090x_chk_signal(state); >>> + (void) stv090x_chk_signal(state); >> >> Why are you casting return to void? I can't see there is a reason to it. > The idea is to tell the compiler that I know that stv090x_chk_signal() > return a value and I want to ignore it. It is to prevent the compiler > to issue warn_unused_result. I found two ways of doing it. First is > casting the return to void, second is to change the function > definition adding the macro __must_check defined at <linux/compiler.c> defined at <linux/compiler.h> > like on: > > http://lxr.linux.no/linux+v3.4.4/include/linux/kernel.h#L215 > > The (void) solution looked simpler to me, but I'll be happy to change > to the __must_check solution if better. What do you think? Keep as is? > Add a comment? Change to __must_check? > > > > >> >> Regards, >> Ezequiel. > > Regards, > > Peter > > -- > Peter Senna Tschudin > peter.senna@xxxxxxxxx > gpg id: 48274C36 -- Peter Senna Tschudin peter.senna@xxxxxxxxx gpg id: 48274C36 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
