@@ -510,6 +510,7 @@ static void __init ams_delta_init(void)
static void modem_pm(struct uart_port *port, unsigned int state, unsigned old)
{
struct modem_private_data *priv = port->private_data;
+ int ret;
if (IS_ERR(priv->regulator))
return;
@@ -518,9 +519,16 @@ static void modem_pm(struct uart_port *port, unsigned int state, unsigned old)
return;
if (state == 0)
- regulator_enable(priv->regulator);
+ ret = regulator_enable(priv->regulator);
else if (old == 0)
- regulator_disable(priv->regulator);
+ ret = regulator_disable(priv->regulator);
+ else
+ ret = 0;
+
+ if (ret)
+ dev_warn(port->dev,
+ "ams_delta modem_pm: failed to %sable regulator: %d\n",
+ state ? "dis" : "en", ret);
}
static struct plat_serial8250_port ams_delta_modem_ports[] = {
The modem pm handler in the ams-delta board uses regulator_enable() but does not check for a successful return code: board-ams-delta.c:521:3: error: ignoring return value of 'regulator_enable', declared with attribute warn_unused_result [-Werror=unused-result] It is not easy to propagate that return code to the callers in uart_configure_port/uart_suspend_port/uart_resume_port, unless we change all UART drivers, and it is unclear what those would do with the return code. Instead, this patch uses a runtime warning to replace the compiletime warning. I have checked that the regulator in question is hardcoded to a fixed-voltage GPIO regulator, and that should never fail to get enabled if I understand the code right. Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> --- arch/arm/mach-omap1/board-ams-delta.c | 12 ++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) -- 2.7.0