[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <49c14f8f-0c08-41e0-b987-7c4253edf6de@nvidia.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2024 13:40:53 -0700
From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
To: Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
CC: angquan yu <angquan21@...il.com>, "Kirill A . Shutemov"
<kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Binbin Wu
<binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>, Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>, "Rick
Edgecombe" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>, Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@...el.com>,
Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com>, Dave Hansen
<dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, Muhammad Usama Anjum
<usama.anjum@...labora.com>, Valentin Obst <kernel@...entinobst.de>,
<linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<llvm@...ts.linux.dev>, <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/7] selftests/x86: fix build errors and warnings found
via clang
On 7/9/24 1:34 PM, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 7/4/24 01:24, John Hubbard wrote:
...>> Muhammad Usama Anjum (1):
>> selftests: x86: test_FISTTP: use fisttps instead of ambiguous fisttp
>
>
> Usama and John,
>
> I am seeing checkpatch warnings in this series.
>
> v4-3-7
> WARNING: externs should be avoided in .c files
> #210: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/x86/fsgsbase_restore.c:46:
> +unsigned int dereference_seg_base(void);
>
> ARNING: Consecutive strings are generally better as a single string
> #156: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/x86/test_FISTTP.c:28:
> + " fisttps res16""\n"
>
> WARNING: Consecutive strings are generally better as a single string
> #165: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/x86/test_FISTTP.c:48:
> + " fisttps res16""\n"
>
> WARNING: Consecutive strings are generally better as a single string
> #174: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/x86/test_FISTTP.c:69:
> + " fisttps res16""\n"
>
> WARNING: Consecutive strings are generally better as a single string
> #183: FILE: tools/testing/selftests/x86/test_FISTTP.c:91:
> + " fisttps res16""\n"
>
> total: 0 errors, 5 warnings, 32 lines checked
>
> Can you take a look at these and see if they can be fixed. Send me
> v5 with these fixed - I will pull these in for 6.11-rc1
>
> thanks,
> -- Shuah
Hi Shuah,
These warnings are pre-existing. For such things, it's usually prudent
to avoid changing them--or at least, not in the same patch.
I think it's best to submit the patch (and series) as-is. If the x86
team wants the above things cleaned up (which I seriously doubt), they'll
let us know.
Yes?
thanks,
--
John Hubbard
NVIDIA
Powered by blists - more mailing lists