Re: trivial patches: Should we care about control reaches end ofnon-void function

[Alan Cox]

>   I see some functions in the kernel have added "return 0" after the
>  BUG, presumably to silence these warnings.  Would a patch to do this
>  consistently, or is that too trivial even for trivial patches?

Probably better to mark BUG() properly for the compiler.

If you can get __attribute((__noreturn__)) on the end of the BUG function
somehow say

static inline void bug_off(void) __attribute((__noreturn__)) {};

and expanded that onto the end of the macro maybe it would shut up

Alan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/