[PATCH 4/4] staging: ste_rmi4: Suppress 'ignoring return value of ‘regulator_enable()' warning

[Dan Carpenter]

On Fri, May 03, 2013 at 12:37:14PM +0530, Srinidhi Kasagar wrote:
> On Thu, May 02, 2013 at 17:48:10 +0200, Lee Jones wrote:
> > drivers/staging/ste_rmi4/synaptics_i2c_rmi4.c:
> >         In function ‘synaptics_rmi4_resume’:
> > drivers/staging/ste_rmi4/synaptics_i2c_rmi4.c:1090:18:
> >         warning: ignoring return value of ‘regulator_enable’, declared
> >         with attribute warn_unused_result [-Wunused-result
> > 
> > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh at linuxfoundation.org>
> > Cc: devel at driverdev.osuosl.org
> > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones at linaro.org>
> > ---
> >  drivers/staging/ste_rmi4/synaptics_i2c_rmi4.c |    4 +++-
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/ste_rmi4/synaptics_i2c_rmi4.c b/drivers/staging/ste_rmi4/synaptics_i2c_rmi4.c
> > index fe667dd..c4d013d 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/ste_rmi4/synaptics_i2c_rmi4.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/ste_rmi4/synaptics_i2c_rmi4.c
> > @@ -1087,7 +1087,9 @@ static int synaptics_rmi4_resume(struct device *dev)
> >  	unsigned char intr_status;
> >  	struct synaptics_rmi4_data *rmi4_data = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> >  
> > -	regulator_enable(rmi4_data->regulator);
> > +	retval = regulator_enable(rmi4_data->regulator);
> > +	if (retval < 0)
> > +		return retval;
> Does it make sense to add a dev_err?
> 

Is that a question?

regulator_enable() already prints some warnings.  Probably it's not
going to fail and adding code that is duplicative or will never be
run is pointless.

regards,
dan carpenter