linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 06/14] gpu: nova-core: Add GSP command queue bindings

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4lkclhrurxpxamlsf45dfoihmh4zrorgsr4jibqp3ye6tqd2xd@xfjllw4j55aa>
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2025 15:03:36 +1100
From: Alistair Popple <apopple@...dia.com>
To: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
Cc: Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@...dia.com>, 
	rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, dakr@...nel.org, 
	Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>, 
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>, 
	Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>, Benno Lossin <lossin@...nel.org>, 
	Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...nel.org>, Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, 
	Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>, David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, 
	Simona Vetter <simona@...ll.ch>, Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>, 
	Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>, 
	John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>, Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@...dia.com>, 
	Timur Tabi <ttabi@...dia.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 06/14] gpu: nova-core: Add GSP command queue bindings

On 2025-10-17 at 06:22 +1100, Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com> wrote...
> On Thu, Oct 16, 2025 at 8:24 AM Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@...dia.com> wrote:
> >
> > There are lots of unused warnings when building on this commit. I know
> > we don't like big patches, but since this is semantically related to the
> > next one and the two touch different files anyway, how about merging
> > them? IMHO this is preferable to adding lots of `#[expect(unused)]` that
> > we are going to remove right after.
> >
> > If you have been told to split in a previous version, let's just add a
> > the `#[expect(unused)]`  where needed.

No, I just split it here because it seemed like a nice self-contained thing.
That and I'm conditioned to linux-mm patches where 20 changes is often
considered a big patch :-)

So I will probably just squash this as suggested.

> 
> A possible middle-ground is to add the `expect` in a "more global"
> position, e.g. at the top, so that it is a single line change. I think
> that is fine as long as it is removed right after.

That could work, thanks.

> Thanks!
> 
> Cheers,
> Miguel