On 15/06/16 21:31, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > When building with -Wextra, we get a harmless warning from the > EFX_EXTRACT_OWORD32 macro: > > ethernet/sfc/farch.c: In function 'efx_farch_test_registers': > ethernet/sfc/farch.c:119:30: error: comparison of unsigned expression < 0 is > always false [-Werror=type-limits] > ethernet/sfc/farch.c:124:144: error: comparison of unsigned expression < 0 is > always false [-Werror=type-limits] > ethernet/sfc/farch.c:124:392: error: comparison of unsigned expression < 0 is > always false [-Werror=type-limits] > ethernet/sfc/farch.c:124:731: error: comparison of unsigned expression < 0 is > always false [-Werror=type-limits] > > The macro and the caller are both correct, but we can avoid the > warning by changing the index variable to a signed type. > > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <a...@arndb.de>
Acked-by: Bert Kenward <bkenw...@solarflare.com> > --- > drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/farch.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/farch.c > b/drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/farch.c > index 133e9e35be9e..4c83739d158f 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/farch.c > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/farch.c > @@ -104,7 +104,8 @@ int efx_farch_test_registers(struct efx_nic *efx, > const struct efx_farch_register_test *regs, > size_t n_regs) > { > - unsigned address = 0, i, j; > + unsigned address = 0; > + int i, j; > efx_oword_t mask, imask, original, reg, buf; > > for (i = 0; i < n_regs; ++i) { >