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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200828085301.78423-1-luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com>
 <CANiq72no4vv1dX13W8LL6kXj_0ethn0cbUfxM5Nn_Nxag-BrfQ@mail.gmail.com> <20200828201516.p33577vucl6ke4j5@ltop.local>
In-Reply-To: <20200828201516.p33577vucl6ke4j5@ltop.local>
From:   Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 29 Aug 2020 09:33:31 +0200
Message-ID: <CANiq72njPaiPgTKWhZ696Nr+jDiTN1Vqu0ML8DdK==sjSnS1aw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sparse: use static inline for __chk_{user,io}_ptr()
To:     Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi Luc,

On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 10:15 PM Luc Van Oostenryck
<luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> But to the bot, any change to the content of the warning itself
> or its associated info is presented as a new warning.
> I've talked to the bot's guys about this problem and they've
> replied that they're seriously considering to change this behaviour.

I see! Well, I guess having a "false positive" is OK in that case. It
makes us look twice.

Thanks, queued!

Cheers,
Miguel