Russell King - ARM Linux wrote, on 01/07/2011 05:57 AM:
In file included from arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/omap_hwmod.h:37,
from arch/arm/mach-omap2/io.c:45:
arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/voltage.h: In function âomap_voltage_register_pmicâ:
arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/voltage.h:137: warning: no return statement in function returning non-void
which gets spammed out all through the build. voltage.h:137 says:
static inline int omap_voltage_register_pmic(struct voltagedomain *voltdm,
struct omap_volt_pmic_info *pmic_info) {}
but no one checks the return value for this:
arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_twl.c: omap_voltage_register_pmic(voltdm,&omap4_mpu_volt_info);
arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_twl.c: omap_voltage_register_pmic(voltdm,&omap4_iva_volt_info);
arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_twl.c: omap_voltage_register_pmic(voltdm,&omap4_core_volt_info);
arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_twl.c: omap_voltage_register_pmic(voltdm,&omap3_mpu_volt_info);
arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_twl.c: omap_voltage_register_pmic(voltdm,&omap3_core_volt_info);
so I don't see the point of it returning an 'int'.
intent was that in the future the volt_info would be validated and users
will check as well.
--
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
