Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests/bpf: fix warning comparing pointer to 0
To:     Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Cc:     linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <1616032552-39866-1-git-send-email-jiapeng.chong@linux.alibaba.com>
 <4983305a-3119-bb4b-bb51-520ed5bd28ac@iogearbox.net>
From:   Jiapeng Chong <jiapeng.chong@linux.alibaba.com>
Message-ID: <745a3bff-6b0e-f707-ffb5-d9f24063b57d@linux.alibaba.com>
Date:   Thu, 22 Apr 2021 16:09:45 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4983305a-3119-bb4b-bb51-520ed5bd28ac@iogearbox.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 2021/3/19 0:23, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 3/18/21 2:55 AM, Jiapeng Chong wrote:
>> Fix the following coccicheck warning:
>>
>> ./tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fentry_test.c:76:15-16: WARNING
>> comparing pointer to 0.
>>
>> Reported-by: Abaci Robot <abaci@linux.alibaba.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Jiapeng Chong <jiapeng.chong@linux.alibaba.com>
>> ---
>>   tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fentry_test.c | 4 ++--
>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fentry_test.c 
>> b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fentry_test.c
>> index 5f645fd..d4247d6 100644
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fentry_test.c
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fentry_test.c
>> @@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ struct bpf_fentry_test_t {
>>   SEC("fentry/bpf_fentry_test7")
>>   int BPF_PROG(test7, struct bpf_fentry_test_t *arg)
>>   {
>> -    if (arg == 0)
>> +    if (!arg)
>>           test7_result = 1;
>>       return 0;
>>   }
>> @@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ int BPF_PROG(test7, struct bpf_fentry_test_t *arg)
>>   SEC("fentry/bpf_fentry_test8")
>>   int BPF_PROG(test8, struct bpf_fentry_test_t *arg)
>>   {
>> -    if (arg->a == 0)
>> +    if (!arg->a)
>>           test8_result = 1;
>>       return 0;
>>   }
>>
> 
> This doesn't apply. Please rebase against bpf-next tree, and also make 
> sure to
> squash any other such patches into a single one.

OK, I'll submit it to the latest branch bpf-next tree later.