On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 09:52:30AM +0100, Colin King wrote:
> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> The subtraction of the two pointers is automatically scaled by the
> size of the size of the object the pointers point to, so the division
> by sizeof(*i2400m->barker) is incorrect. Fix this by removing the
> division. Also make index an unsigned int to clean up a checkpatch
> warning.
>
> Addresses-Coverity: ("Extra sizeof expression")
> Fixes: aba3792ac2d7 ("wimax/i2400m: rework bootrom initialization to be more flexible")
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/net/wimax/i2400m/fw.c | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wimax/i2400m/fw.c b/drivers/net/wimax/i2400m/fw.c
> index 489cba9b284d..599a703af6eb 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wimax/i2400m/fw.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wimax/i2400m/fw.c
> @@ -399,8 +399,7 @@ int i2400m_is_boot_barker(struct i2400m *i2400m,
> * associated with the device. */
> if (i2400m->barker
> && !memcmp(buf, i2400m->barker, sizeof(i2400m->barker->data))) {
> - unsigned index = (i2400m->barker - i2400m_barker_db)
> - / sizeof(*i2400m->barker);
> + unsigned int index = i2400m->barker - i2400m_barker_db;
> d_printf(2, dev, "boot barker cache-confirmed #%u/%08x\n",
> index, le32_to_cpu(i2400m->barker->data[0]));
It's only used for this debug output. You may as well just delete it.
> return 0;
regards,
dan carpenter
