On 2 February 2015 at 06:22, Ola Liljedahl <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 2 February 2015 at 12:18, Ola Liljedahl <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > On 2 February 2015 at 12:05, Maxim Uvarov <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >> On 01/29/2015 01:39 PM, Ola Liljedahl wrote:
> >>>
> >>>         num_workers = odph_linux_cpumask_default(&cpumask,
> num_workers);
> >>> -       odp_cpumask_to_str(&cpumask, cpumaskstr, sizeof(cpumaskstr));
> >>> +       size_t bufsz = sizeof(cpumaskstr);
> >>> +       (void)odp_cpumask_to_str(&cpumask, cpumaskstr, &bufsz);
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> why did add this (void)?
> > Because odp_cpumask_to_str() has a return value that you normally
> > should check. If I think the return value for some reason doesn't
> > merit checking, then I cast the function call to "(void)".
> >
> > If you are closing a file/socket descriptor you have written to, you
> > should check the return value from close() because writes may have
> > been buffered and close may fail writing out your data.. But if the
> > file descriptor was e.g. only used for reading, then you don't need to
> > check the return value from close(). Ideally the compiler should warn
> > if you are not checking the return value from close() and in the
> > second case above, you would use "(void)close(fd);".
> >
> > I think the compiler can warn if return values are not used. Possibly
> > this is controlled using some GCC attribute.
>
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2870529/g-how-to-get-warning-on-ignoring-function-return-value
>
> Something for ODP?
>

Looks reasonable - coverity is currently list two such cases, it is smart
enough to work out that you "usually" check the return for a particular
function rather than just warn every time

CID 85004: Unchecked return value (CHECKED_RETURN)6. check_return: Calling
_odp_packet_copy_to_packet without checking return value (as is done
elsewhere 5 out of 6 times).
369                _odp_packet_copy_to_packet(params->pkt, 0, params->
out_pkt, 0,
370                                           odp_packet_len(params->pkt));



>
> > BTW: This patch series is obsolete, I am currently rebasing it.
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Maxim.
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> lng-odp mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
>
> _______________________________________________
> lng-odp mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
>



-- 
*Mike Holmes*
Linaro  Sr Technical Manager
LNG - ODP
_______________________________________________
lng-odp mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp

Reply via email to