On Mon, May 8, 2023 at 9:57 AM Heiko Carstens <hca@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, May 08, 2023 at 09:45:56AM -0700, Nhat Pham wrote: > > On Sat, May 6, 2023 at 5:28 PM kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > sparse warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>) > > > mm/filemap.c:1416:17: sparse: sparse: context imbalance in 'migration_entry_wait_on_locked' - unexpected unlock > > > >> mm/filemap.c:4250:1: sparse: sparse: Using plain integer as NULL pointer > > > >> mm/filemap.c:4250:1: sparse: sparse: Using plain integer as NULL pointer > > > >> mm/filemap.c:4250:1: sparse: sparse: Using plain integer as NULL pointer > ... > > > > 4250 SYSCALL_DEFINE4(cachestat, unsigned int, fd, > > > > Hmm I couldn't see where I used 0 as the null pointer. Maybe > > this is a false positive or a result of not wiring up the syscall > > for s390? Especially since this is pointed toward the macro > > line (SYSCALL_DEFINE). > > > > cc-ing this to s390 maintainers and the s390 mailing list... > > Could you help me debug this? Thanks! > > Just ignore, this is a known false positive with s390's SYSCALL_DEFINE() > implementation vs sparse. I looked into it once, but couldn't figure out > how to silence sparse. > IIRC, the __TYPE_IS_PTR() macro causes this. Thanks for the prompt response and support, Heiko!
