Pádraig Brady <P@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 02/25/2012 02:27 AM, Eric Wong wrote: > > + force_page_cache_readahead(mapping, file, start_index, nrpages); > > break; > > This whole patch makes sense to me. > The above chunk might cause confusion in future, > if people wonder for a moment why the return is ignored. > Should you use cast with (void) like this to be explicit? > > (void) force_page_cache_readahead(...); I considered this, too[1]. However I checked for existing usages of force_page_cache_readahead() noticed they just ignore the return value like I did in my patch, so I followed existing convention for this function. I didn't find any suggestion in Documentation/CodingStyle for this. Thanks for looking at this. [1] - it's what I normally do in my own projects. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>