Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:18 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220304124416.1181029-1-mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr>
 <CAHp75VeT3LbdbSaiwcC2YW40LnA2h8ADtGva-CKU_xh8Edi0nw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20220307105810.1747024-1-alexandr.lobakin@intel.com> <CAHp75Vcht_T5kUJu5zjmsUvn+mN+8D5vWBUvRXKTfo+2ocHOTg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMZ6RqK=yxLwVnotZuGRiao4Vu4eFEfVXfPaZV1r4rEOmQARig@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHp75VfS0wSB+5dXHvoYfQqe0qEW0dOXGChunqu7PX0BZ4orMA@mail.gmail.com> <CAMZ6Rq+Esmr4s6eTQPwEX3hjhCDTVgt-wDU=zTaE8gJxBZHg2g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMZ6Rq+Esmr4s6eTQPwEX3hjhCDTVgt-wDU=zTaE8gJxBZHg2g@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 8 Mar 2022 14:32:13 +0200
Message-ID: <CAHp75Vdb0-0vbh76JoRX7ov6F8vgODw1rS2Lp4XKpFA9xX-tVA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] linux/bits.h: fix -Wtype-limits warnings in GENMASK_INPUT_CHECK()
To:     Vincent MAILHOL <mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr>
Cc:     Alexander Lobakin <alexandr.lobakin@intel.com>,
        Rikard Falkeborn <rikard.falkeborn@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Mar 8, 2022 at 2:22 PM Vincent MAILHOL
<mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> On Tue. 8 Mar 2022 at 01:33, Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 7, 2022 at 4:06 PM Vincent MAILHOL
> > <mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> > > On Mon. 7 Mar 2022 at 22:40, Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote:

...

> > > I do not understand why I should be forbidden to fix a W=2 in the
> > > file which I am maintaining on the grounds that some code to which
> > > I do not care still has some W=1.
> >
> > It's not forbidden. I said something different.
> >
> > Whatever, thank you for doing it, perhaps we will have less noise in W=2 case.
>
> Great! So does it mean you are withdrawing your NAK?
> Or do you still have concern on the patch itself?

I'm not stopping you from amending a commit message (including
dropping noise from it and leaving only a partial example of the
compiler complaint), Cc'ing a new version to the people from this and
the discussion mentioned previously.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko