From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934685AbYBTUns (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Feb 2008 15:43:48 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1761297AbYBTUnc (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Feb 2008 15:43:32 -0500 Received: from mx2.netapp.com ([216.240.18.37]:28163 "EHLO mx2.netapp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758296AbYBTUna (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Feb 2008 15:43:30 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,382,1199692800"; d="scan'208";a="154495731" Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] nfs: fix sparse warning in nfs4state.c From: Trond Myklebust To: Harvey Harrison Cc: Andrew Morton , LKML In-Reply-To: <1203538246.25307.14.camel@brick> References: <1203538246.25307.14.camel@brick> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Organization: Network Appliance Inc Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 15:43:26 -0500 Message-Id: <1203540206.17505.3.camel@heimdal.trondhjem.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.1 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 20 Feb 2008 20:43:28.0200 (UTC) FILETIME=[3F121C80:01C87401] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2008-02-20 at 12:10 -0800, Harvey Harrison wrote: > fs/nfs/nfs4state.c:788:34: warning: Using plain integer as NULL pointer > > Signed-off-by: Harvey Harrison > --- > fs/nfs/nfs4state.c | 2 +- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/nfs/nfs4state.c b/fs/nfs/nfs4state.c > index 6233eb5..b962397 100644 > --- a/fs/nfs/nfs4state.c > +++ b/fs/nfs/nfs4state.c > @@ -785,7 +785,7 @@ static int nfs4_reclaim_locks(struct nfs4_state_recovery_ops *ops, struct nfs4_s > struct file_lock *fl; > int status = 0; > > - for (fl = inode->i_flock; fl != 0; fl = fl->fl_next) { > + for (fl = inode->i_flock; fl != NULL; fl = fl->fl_next) { > if (!(fl->fl_flags & (FL_POSIX|FL_FLOCK))) > continue; > if (nfs_file_open_context(fl->fl_file)->state != state) Could you please just wrap these 4 up into a single patch? They are all fixing up the same issue, and they are trivial to review, so there is very little benefit in separating them. Thanks Trond