Patchwork firmware: efi: arm-runtime: fix build error void value not ignored

login
register
mail settings
Submitter Anders Roxell
Date Feb. 4, 2019, 1:29 p.m.
Message ID <20190204132904.9288-1-anders.roxell@linaro.org>
Download mbox | patch
Permalink /patch/717297/
State New
Headers show

Comments

Anders Roxell - Feb. 4, 2019, 1:29 p.m.
Commit e2a2e56e4082 ("arm64: dump: no need to check return value of debugfs_create functions")
changed the return value from 'int' to 'void'.

../drivers/firmware/efi/arm-runtime.c: In function ‘ptdump_init’:
../drivers/firmware/efi/arm-runtime.c:52:9: error: void value not ignored as it ought to be
  return ptdump_debugfs_register(&efi_ptdump_info, "efi_page_tables");
         ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
../drivers/firmware/efi/arm-runtime.c:53:1: warning: control reaches end of non-void function [-Wreturn-type]
 }
 ^

Rework so that function 'ptdump_init' doesn't 'return
ptdump_debug_fs_register(...' since the function can work or not, but
the code logic should never do something different based on this.

Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org>
---
 drivers/firmware/efi/arm-runtime.c | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
Ard Biesheuvel - Feb. 4, 2019, 1:42 p.m.
On Mon, 4 Feb 2019 at 14:29, Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> Commit e2a2e56e4082 ("arm64: dump: no need to check return value of debugfs_create functions")
> changed the return value from 'int' to 'void'.
>
> ../drivers/firmware/efi/arm-runtime.c: In function ‘ptdump_init’:
> ../drivers/firmware/efi/arm-runtime.c:52:9: error: void value not ignored as it ought to be
>   return ptdump_debugfs_register(&efi_ptdump_info, "efi_page_tables");
>          ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> ../drivers/firmware/efi/arm-runtime.c:53:1: warning: control reaches end of non-void function [-Wreturn-type]
>  }
>  ^
>
> Rework so that function 'ptdump_init' doesn't 'return
> ptdump_debug_fs_register(...' since the function can work or not, but
> the code logic should never do something different based on this.
>
> Signed-off-by: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org>

Hi Anders,

Thanks for the fix.

Someone else spotted the same bug, and sent a similar fix, and I asked
Will or Catalin to take it through the arm64 for-next tree since this
is where the offending patch lives.

So for either this patch or for the other one

Acked-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>



> ---
>  drivers/firmware/efi/arm-runtime.c | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/arm-runtime.c b/drivers/firmware/efi/arm-runtime.c
> index 352bd2473162..b9ae798192d6 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/efi/arm-runtime.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/arm-runtime.c
> @@ -49,7 +49,8 @@ static int __init ptdump_init(void)
>         if (!efi_enabled(EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES))
>                 return 0;
>
> -       return ptdump_debugfs_register(&efi_ptdump_info, "efi_page_tables");
> +       ptdump_debugfs_register(&efi_ptdump_info, "efi_page_tables");
> +       return 0;
>  }
>  device_initcall(ptdump_init);
>
> --
> 2.20.1
>

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/arm-runtime.c b/drivers/firmware/efi/arm-runtime.c
index 352bd2473162..b9ae798192d6 100644
--- a/drivers/firmware/efi/arm-runtime.c
+++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/arm-runtime.c
@@ -49,7 +49,8 @@  static int __init ptdump_init(void)
 	if (!efi_enabled(EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES))
 		return 0;
 
-	return ptdump_debugfs_register(&efi_ptdump_info, "efi_page_tables");
+	ptdump_debugfs_register(&efi_ptdump_info, "efi_page_tables");
+	return 0;
 }
 device_initcall(ptdump_init);