[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <747887ef-224b-8d4b-0165-4d043c8b87f5@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2019 09:41:46 -0700
From: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
Kamal Dasu <kdasu.kdev@...il.com>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@...il.com>,
Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
"open list:BROADCOM STB NAND FLASH DRIVER"
<linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
"open list:BROADCOM STB NAND FLASH DRIVER"
<bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: rawnand: brcmnand: Fix sparse warning in
has_flash_dma()
On 10/19/19 2:39 AM, Miquel Raynal wrote:
> Hi Florian,
>
> Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com> wrote on Fri, 18 Oct 2019
> 16:38:44 -0700:
>
>> Sparse rightfully complained about has_flash_dma():
>> +drivers/mtd/nand/brcmnand/brcmnand.c:951:40: warning: Using plain integer as NULL pointer [sparse]
>
> I don't get why would sparse complain about this... Anyway I prefer
> the !!(<pointer>) alternative if you don't mind. Otherwise the "!=
> NULL" comparison feels wrong.
I did not read the sparse complaint correctly and mixed up two issues
(one downstream, one upstream) there is still one that is legitimately
reported by sparse and that will be fixed in a v2, thanks.
--
Florian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists