Sven Eckelmann <sven@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Tuesday, 11 February 2020 14:10:04 CET Kalle Valo wrote:
> [...]
>> > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath11k/dp_tx.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath11k/dp_tx.c
>> > index 7b532bf9acd8..66a6cfd54ad9 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath11k/dp_tx.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath11k/dp_tx.c
>> > @@ -357,9 +357,12 @@ static void ath11k_dp_tx_complete_msdu(struct ath11k *ar,
>> > struct sk_buff *msdu,
>> > struct hal_tx_status *ts)
>> > {
>> > + struct ieee80211_tx_status status = { 0 };
>>
>> This adds a sparse warning:
>>
>> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath11k/dp_tx.c:350:47: warning: Using plain
>> integer as NULL pointer
>>
>> Seems like a false warning, no? But not sure how to shut up the warning,
>> using '{ NULL }' would do that but just feels wrong. Any opinions?
>
> Why is this a false warning? The structure is following:
>
> struct ieee80211_tx_status {
> struct ieee80211_sta *sta;
> struct ieee80211_tx_info *info;
> struct sk_buff *skb;
> struct rate_info *rate;
> };
>
> And this is a pre-C99 initializer. The equal C99-Initializer would be
>
> struct ieee80211_tx_status status = {
> .sta = NULL,
> };
>
> So it is initializing status.sta with 0. But status.sta is a pointer
> and we should use NULL for pointers instead of plain 0. If you want
> to initialize the object on stack to zero but not initialize each
> member then just use {}.
Ah, of course. Thanks for pointing this out.
--
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
