From patchwork Fri Jul 17 14:04:05 2020 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Sudeep Holla X-Patchwork-Id: 11670437 Return-Path: Received: from mail.kernel.org (pdx-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [172.30.200.123]) by pdx-korg-patchwork-2.web.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 147DE13B4 for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 14:04:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) id 0EA962083B; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 14:04:13 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: soc@kernel.org Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8D92207EA; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 14:04:12 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org C8D92207EA Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sudeep.holla@arm.com Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5614930E; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 07:04:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from usa.arm.com (e103737-lin.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.197.49]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 81FE13F66E; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 07:04:11 -0700 (PDT) From: Sudeep Holla List-Id: To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, arm@kernel.org, soc@kernel.org Cc: Sudeep Holla , Arnd Bergmann Subject: [PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: Use NULL instead of integer 0 for rate pointer Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2020 15:04:05 +0100 Message-Id: <20200717140405.17905-1-sudeep.holla@arm.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.17.1 Kbuild test robot reports the following sparse warning: drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/clock.c:142:21: sparse: Using plain integer as NULL pointer Use NULL pointer instead of integer 0 for rate pointer and fix the warning. Reported-by: kernel test robot Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla --- drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/clock.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) Hi Arnd, Kbuild test robot reported this warning from the soc tree. Can you apply this directly or do you prefer pull request. Let me know. Regards, Sudeep -- 2.17.1 diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/clock.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/clock.c index 6593ce87f420..75e39882746e 100644 --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/clock.c +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/clock.c @@ -139,7 +139,7 @@ static int scmi_clock_describe_rates_get(const struct scmi_handle *handle, u32 clk_id, struct scmi_clock_info *clk) { - u64 *rate = 0; + u64 *rate = NULL; int ret, cnt; bool rate_discrete = false; u32 tot_rate_cnt = 0, rates_flag;