On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 14:50:42 -0500 Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I agree that clkfactor_f6_resolv() could return 0, but we have not > been overrun with reports of divide by zero errors, which suggests > that the branch is never taken. This patch will make your tool happy > and is much simpler: > > diff --git a/drivers/ssb/main.c b/drivers/ssb/main.c > index ab080cf26c9f..b9934b9c2d70 100644 > --- a/drivers/ssb/main.c > +++ b/drivers/ssb/main.c > @@ -837,7 +837,7 @@ static u32 clkfactor_f6_resolve(u32 v) > case SSB_CHIPCO_CLK_F6_7: > return 7; > } > - return 0; > + return 1; > } Yes, I agree that this is the much simpler and also more sensible solution to this theoretical problem. -- Michael Büsch https://bues.ch/
Attachment:
pgpxFzwP3pK3S.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
