> On Tue, 06 May 2008 14:43:01 -0700 (PDT)
> David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
>
> > From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> > Date: Tue, 6 May 2008 14:39:36 -0700
> >
> > > On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 14:34:01 +1000
> > >
tony@bakeyournoodle.com (Tony Breeds) wrote:
> > >
> > > > Current kernel builds warn about:
> > > > drivers/video/aty/radeon_base.c: In function
> > > > 'radeonfb_pci_register': drivers/video/aty/radeon_base.c:2334:
> > > > warning: ignoring return value of 'sysfs_create_bin_file',
> > > > declared with attribute warn_unused_result
> > > > drivers/video/aty/radeon_base.c:2336: warning: ignoring return
> > > > value of 'sysfs_create_bin_file', declared with attribute
> > > > warn_unused_result
> > > >
> > > > Do minimal checking of these functions and issue a warning if
> > > > either fails. They don't seem to be critical..
> > >
> > > well OK, but I object to the patch title!
> > >
> > > The point isn't to silence warnings. It is to fix the problem
> > > which that warning is drawing our attention to.
> > >
> > > So I rewrote the title to "drivers/video/aty/radeon_base.c:
> > > notify user if sysfs_create_bin_file() failed".
> > >
> > > And your fix looks appropriate - if sysfs_create_bin_file() fails
> > > we will now get reports of this and we can find out what kernel
> > > bug caused this to happen.
> >
> > The last time someone "fixed" this warning in the radeon driver,
> > people lost their consoles.
> >
> > Just giving a heads up...
>
> heh, thanks.
>
> This one just emits a warning:
>
> @@ -2340,9 +2341,12 @@ static int __devinit radeonfb_pci_regist
>
> /* Register some sysfs stuff (should be done better) */
> if (rinfo->mon1_EDID)
> - sysfs_create_bin_file(&rinfo->pdev->dev.kobj,
> &edid1_attr);
> + err |= sysfs_create_bin_file(&rinfo->pdev->dev.kobj,
> &edid1_attr); if (rinfo->mon2_EDID)
> - sysfs_create_bin_file(&rinfo->pdev->dev.kobj,
> &edid2_attr);
> + err |= sysfs_create_bin_file(&rinfo->pdev->dev.kobj,
> &edid2_attr);
> + if (err)
> + pr_warning("%s() Creating sysfs files failed,
> continuing\n",
> + __func__);
>
> /* save current mode regs before we switch into the new one
> * so we can restore this upon __exit
> _
>
>
> So from what you say, it sounds like we will be seeing that warning.
> I wonder why.
