Em Tue, 10 Dec 2024 19:55:58 +0000 Ricardo Ribalda <ribalda@xxxxxxxxxxxx> escreveu: > One of the quirks that we introduced to build with !ACPI && COMPILE_TEST > throws the following smatch warning: > drivers/media/pci/intel/ipu-bridge.c:752 ipu_bridge_ivsc_is_ready() warn: iterator 'i' not incremented > > Fix it by replacing the condition. > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx> > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/r/202411221147.N6w23gDo-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/ > Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/r/202411221147.N6w23gDo-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/ > Signed-off-by: Ricardo Ribalda <ribalda@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/media/pci/intel/ipu-bridge.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/media/pci/intel/ipu-bridge.c b/drivers/media/pci/intel/ipu-bridge.c > index a0e9a71580b5..be82bc3e27d0 100644 > --- a/drivers/media/pci/intel/ipu-bridge.c > +++ b/drivers/media/pci/intel/ipu-bridge.c > @@ -774,7 +774,7 @@ static int ipu_bridge_ivsc_is_ready(void) > > for_each_acpi_dev_match(sensor_adev, cfg->hid, NULL, -1) { > #else > - while (true) { > + while (false) { > sensor_adev = NULL; > #endif The better would be to just remove all #if and handle ACPI compatibility with COMPILE_TEST inside acpi headers. Besides that, t sounds that patch 2 makes this hack unneeded, as you added a false check at the for macro: #define for_each_acpi_dev_match(adev, hid, uid, hrv) \ for (adev = NULL; false && (hid) && (uid) && (hrv);) Please place only one set of subsystem maintainers at the To: line, directing to the one(s) you expect to merge this series. In this particular case, the one to be added should be the ACPI maintainers. Regards, Mauro
