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;
Date:   Wed, 8 Jan 2020 10:23:04 +0100
From:   Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@redhat.com>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>,
        Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kallsyms: work around bogus -Wrestrict warning
Message-ID: <20200108092304.6rgulye4zvgptxt7@butterfly.localdomain>
References: <20200107214042.855757-1-arnd@arndb.de>
 <20200107142512.b3d63df56ffee1ef471b6acd@linux-foundation.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200107142512.b3d63df56ffee1ef471b6acd@linux-foundation.org>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi.

On Tue, Jan 07, 2020 at 02:25:12PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> gee, is that even worth "fixing"?  Oleksandr, I've seen a couple of
> these false positives.  Do we know if anyone is taking them to the gcc
> developers?

I'm not aware of such an effort. I tend to blame compiler as an option
of last resort, but if Arnd gathers enough examples (since he's working
on fixing/working around those), it would be reasonable to suggest him to
hand over those findings to gcc bugtracker.

-- 
  Best regards,
    Oleksandr Natalenko (post-factum)
    Senior Software Maintenance Engineer