Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964836AbWJON56 (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 Oct 2006 09:57:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964838AbWJON56 (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 Oct 2006 09:57:58 -0400 Received: from palinux.external.hp.com ([192.25.206.14]:16842 "EHLO mail.parisc-linux.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964836AbWJON55 (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 Oct 2006 09:57:57 -0400 Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2006 07:57:56 -0600 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Alan Cox Cc: David Brownell , akpm@osdl.org, val_henson@linux.intel.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@suse.de Subject: Re: [Bulk] Re: [PATCH 1/2] [PCI] Check that MWI bit really did get set Message-ID: <20061015135756.GD22289@parisc-linux.org> References: <1160161519800-git-send-email-matthew@wil.cx> <20061013214135.8fbc9f04.akpm@osdl.org> <20061014140249.GL11633@parisc-linux.org> <20061014134855.b66d7e65.akpm@osdl.org> <20061015032000.GP11633@parisc-linux.org> <20061015070809.978C714552@adsl-69-226-248-13.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net> <1160922082.5732.51.camel@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1160922082.5732.51.camel@localhost.localdomain> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1228 Lines: 24 On Sun, Oct 15, 2006 at 03:21:22PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > Ar Sul, 2006-10-15 am 00:08 -0700, ysgrifennodd David Brownell: > > Since it's not an error, there should be no such printk ... which > > is exactly how it's coded above. > > The underlying bug is that someone marked pci_set_mwi must-check, that's > wrong for most of the drivers that use it. If you remove the must check > annotation from it then the problem and a thousand other spurious > warnings go away. There's only about 20 users of pci_set_mwi ... about 12 of them seem to check it, one of them uses a variable called compiler_warning_pointless_fix which leaves about 7 warnings to be removed by removing the __must_check. However, I do believe the __must_check should be removed. For example, the LSI 53c1030 has *nothing* to be done if setting MWI fails. It just doesn't work, and the device copes. It's not like Tulip or sym53c8xx where there are additional bits to be set or cleared in control registers. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/