On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 01:34:31PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Sun, May 06, 2018 at 03:03:04PM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote: > > Fixes checkpatch.pl warnings. > > > > Signed-off-by: Nathan Chancellor <natechancel...@gmail.com> > > --- > > drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_hostif.c | 4 ++-- > > drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_wlan.h | 4 ++-- > > drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_wlan_net.c | 8 ++++---- > > 3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_hostif.c > > b/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_hostif.c > > index 628171091786..43090922daff 100644 > > --- a/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_hostif.c > > +++ b/drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_hostif.c > > @@ -475,7 +475,7 @@ void hostif_mib_get_confirm(struct ks_wlan_private > > *priv) > > case DOT11_MAC_ADDRESS: > > hostif_sme_enqueue(priv, SME_GET_MAC_ADDRESS); > > ether_addr_copy(priv->eth_addr, priv->rxp); > > - priv->mac_address_valid = true; > > + priv->mac_address_valid = 1; > > Wait, why? This should be bool, not an int. Why would checkpatch say > this is incorrect? > > confused, > > greg k-h
CHECK: Avoid using bool structure members because of possible alignment issues - see: https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/11/21/384 #417: FILE: drivers/staging/ks7010/ks_wlan.h:417: + bool is_device_open; Introduced by commit a4c4c0492dad ("checkpatch: add a --strict test for structs with bool member definitions"). If this is wrong, please feel free to ignore it! Thanks, Nathan _______________________________________________ devel mailing list de...@linuxdriverproject.org http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
