On 12/06/2016 05:59 AM, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 05:18:08PM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
Detected by sparse.
Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Eli Cohen <eli@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
index 32b09f059c84..abd200e3e299 100644
--- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/main.c
@@ -127,7 +127,7 @@ static int mlx5_netdev_event(struct notifier_block *this,
if ((upper == ndev || (!upper && ndev == ibdev->roce.netdev))
&& ibdev->ib_active) {
- struct ib_event ibev = {0};
+ struct ib_event ibev = { NULL };
I afraid that it is sparse anomality and because NULL==0, the ibev.event
will be initialized to zero, but it is a matter of time when the sparse
will complain about wrong initialization again.
Hello Leon,
The first member of struct ib_event is a pointer so I think the sparse
complaint is correct. Anyway, how about one of the following two
alternatives:
* Change {0} into { }.
* Use memset() instead of an initializer.
Bart.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
