[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20241211093153.7acd91c4@foz.lan>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2024 09:31:53 +0100
From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>
To: Ricardo Ribalda <ribalda@...omium.org>
Cc: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>, Mauro Carvalho Chehab
<mchehab@...nel.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, Len Brown
<lenb@...nel.org>, Robert Moore <robert.moore@...el.com>, "Rafael J.
Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>, Dan Carpenter
<dan.carpenter@...aro.org>, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
acpica-devel@...ts.linux.dev, kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/7] media: ipu-bridge: Fix warning when !ACPI
Em Tue, 10 Dec 2024 22:27:32 +0100
Ricardo Ribalda <ribalda@...omium.org> escreveu:
> On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 at 22:04, Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Ricardo,
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 10, 2024 at 07:55:58PM +0000, Ricardo Ribalda wrote:
> > > One of the quirks that we introduced to build with !ACPI && COMPILE_TEST
> > > throws the following smatch warning:
> > > drivers/media/pci/intel/ipu-bridge.c:752 ipu_bridge_ivsc_is_ready() warn: iterator 'i' not incremented
> > >
> > > Fix it by replacing the condition.
> > >
> > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
> > > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/r/202411221147.N6w23gDo-lkp@intel.com/
> > > Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
> > > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/r/202411221147.N6w23gDo-lkp@intel.com/
> > > Signed-off-by: Ricardo Ribalda <ribalda@...omium.org>
> >
> > I've picked this to my tree and I'll take the last one, too, once the rest
> > reaches the media tree.
>
> Thanks!
>
> If you do not mind, I will keep sending 1/7 when I send v3, to make
> sure it is tested by the CI. I will mark it as duplicate in patchwork.
Patches should not be designed to make CI happy, but to ensure that we
have a nice history at Kernel's log. Patch 1/7 shall be merged with
7/7, as you're just artificially breaking it into without a good
reason, making CI happy, but reviewers and maintainers unhappy :-)
Thanks,
Mauro
Powered by blists - more mailing lists