Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>
To:     Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Cc:     Mao Wenan <maowenan@huawei.com>, pbonzini@redhat.com,
        rkrcmar@redhat.com, sean.j.christopherson@intel.com,
        wanpengli@tencent.com, jmattson@google.com, joro@8bytes.org,
        tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de, hpa@zytor.com,
        kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] KVM: x86: remove set but not used variable 'called'
In-Reply-To: <20191119123956.GC5604@kadam>
References: <20191119030640.25097-1-maowenan@huawei.com> <87o8x8gjr5.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com> <20191119121423.GB5604@kadam> <87imnggidr.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com> <20191119123956.GC5604@kadam>
Date:   Tue, 19 Nov 2019 14:25:40 +0100
Message-ID: <87a78sgfqj.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> writes:

> On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 01:28:32PM +0100, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>> Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> writes:
>>=20
>> > On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 12:58:54PM +0100, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>> >> Mao Wenan <maowenan@huawei.com> writes:
>> >>=20
>> >> > Fixes gcc '-Wunused-but-set-variable' warning:
>> >> >
>> >> > arch/x86/kvm/x86.c: In function kvm_make_scan_ioapic_request_mask:
>> >> > arch/x86/kvm/x86.c:7911:7: warning: variable called set but not
>> >> > used [-Wunused-but-set-variable]
>> >> >
>> >> > It is not used since commit 7ee30bc132c6 ("KVM: x86: deliver KVM
>> >> > IOAPIC scan request to target vCPUs")
>> >>=20
>> >> Better expressed as=20
>> >>=20
>> >> Fixes: 7ee30bc132c6 ("KVM: x86: deliver KVM IOAPIC scan request to ta=
rget vCPUs")
>> >>=20
>> >
>> > There is sort of a debate about this whether the Fixes tag should be
>> > used if it's only a cleanup.
>> >
>>=20
>> I have to admit I'm involved in doing backporting sometimes and I really
>> appreciate Fixes: tags. Just so you know on which side of the debate I
>> am :-)
>
> But we're not going to backport this hopefully?
>

In case we're speaking about stable@ kernels, 7ee30bc132c6 doesn't look
like a good candidate (to me) but who knows, it may get pulled in
because of some code dependency or some other 'autosel magic'. And
that's when 'Fixes:' tags become handy.

--=20
Vitaly