On (22/04/27 15:08), Péter Ujfalusi wrote: > > clang appears to be unhappy otherwise. > > > > error: comparison of array 'cdata->data' equal to a null pointer is always false > > > > Changing this into `if (!cdata->data)` is a little bit better as now > > 'always false' becomes 'always true' > > > > error: address of array 'cdata->data' will always evaluate to 'true' > > Hrm, uhm. clang is right. The check is (and was) bogus... > > cdata->data is a pointer (to cdata->data[0]) which is always: > cdata + sizeof(struct sof_ipc_ctrl_data). > Checking if it is NULL or not is irrelevant and wrong. If we do not have > additional data then cdata->data points to memory which is outside of > the struct and it can be random data (might be 0, might not be). Yeah to be honest that's what I'm thinking too. Does sof_ipc_ctrl_data have to be a var-sized structure? Or can that union hold pointers that are allocated separately? scontrol->data = kzalloc(sizeof sof_ipc_ctrl_data); scontrol->data->chan = kzalloc(sizeof chan * mc->num_channels) > I think we can just drop this check as we would not be here if > additional data was not allocated for the payload prior? I don't have enough knowledge of this code. ->data check doesn't do what it is expected to do so removing it shouldn't do harm.
