Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 2 May 2023 16:31:56 +0900
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To:     Chris Clayton <chris2553@googlemail.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
        torvalds@linux-foundation.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, lwn@lwn.net,
        jslaby@suse.cz
Subject: Re: Linux 6.3.1
Message-ID: <2023050201-bluish-habitable-474a@gregkh>
References: <2023050123-resubmit-silica-ac32@gregkh>
 <c2ac55a4-aaf5-2f49-be08-d326fe0c17f8@googlemail.com>
 <2023050202-slouchy-princess-e7dd@gregkh>
 <2023050225-brutishly-enlarging-c54e@gregkh>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <2023050225-brutishly-enlarging-c54e@gregkh>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, May 02, 2023 at 08:43:47AM +0900, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, May 02, 2023 at 06:40:03AM +0900, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Mon, May 01, 2023 at 07:22:56AM +0100, Chris Clayton wrote:
> > > 6.3.1 FTBFS thusly:
> > 
> > What is "FTBFS"?
> > 
> > > drivers/net/wireguard/timers.c: In function 'wg_expired_retransmit_handshake':
> > > <command-line>: error: format '%d' expects argument of type 'int', but argument 6 has type 'long unsigned int'
> > > [-Werror=format=]
> > > <command-line>: note: in expansion of macro 'KBUILD_MODNAME'
> > > ./include/linux/dynamic_debug.h:223:29: note: in expansion of macro 'pr_fmt'
> > >   223 |                 func(&id, ##__VA_ARGS__);                       \
> > >       |                             ^~~~~~~~~~~
> > 
> > <snip>
> > 
> > > There's a patch to drivers/net/wireguard/timers.c that fixes these errors and you can find it at
> > > 2d4ee16d969c97996e80e4c9cb6de0acaff22c9f in Linus' tree.
> > 
> > Thanks for this report, we'll queue it up soon.
> 
> Odd, that commit is in 6.2 already, so how are you applying this to
> 6.3.y?

And this is only a gcc13 issue, right?  So it's not a regression, it's
always been there, nothing new caused it in this release from what I can
tell.

Actually I don't see how this is an issue in 6.3.1 anyway, as again, the
proposed fix you gave is in 6.2, so what really is happening here?

confused,

greg k-h