From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5007FC4361B for ; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 14:58:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from krantz.zx2c4.com (krantz.zx2c4.com [192.95.5.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B49F21D95 for ; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 14:58:46 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 8B49F21D95 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=wireguard-bounces@lists.zx2c4.com Received: by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id c65c0960; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 14:50:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-yb1-xb42.google.com (mail-yb1-xb42.google.com [2607:f8b0:4864:20::b42]) by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTPS id 34a0f331 (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256:NO) for ; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 14:50:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-yb1-xb42.google.com with SMTP id t13so12928433ybq.7 for ; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 06:58:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=plNVcmrce8g2J8M3GvZaxtbh0wYjjwJH9EhP4nToGcg=; b=LpFXWaQL6fLau/RHuV7zuorCsHamAKs9/0ITBJlTv5NR82LANrttpzO2ebQMsHpZfG 18b+X5d4gAG21gQxCKibZHkhKwIbA39zfcomdlccbTuhTTpTYE8s66MoSH14+4HiQUnr g4mbJj/cbabq1rM/S6PMysI3haCDy9iyIGpBgd0he39coQdvcCX3FGp28qe7ki5efaDV DBw+xjWRj9e3WpJE8JAacbCQFHl5SMH3FRHCj/uBZ6C2eT+VmDlUybrGEq1alP6Zll1R oPZbKzlxxQp7fxvY3PmQ59y30aadQOZGheSPiTTOv/SGokObhWdsdMTtSemZUbpWin2k P+DQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=plNVcmrce8g2J8M3GvZaxtbh0wYjjwJH9EhP4nToGcg=; b=CD1pPJIQtShQfKZEJSEIXEowQmCrQ+gzP14OgOsTBdR8epIyenscA3g7E6hMcd9bH9 EtpHPt1FHtLEP7+FvI1RKaAI2A7qYsJVOvLnPlrJrwYDkApjNPk/QJserFkVKR+XpKYr ZC7XZK8Ztz3nSYWB3CJ7OTEllMCYJgl1aAhJ54dYrNalPyeIHFILsGVHeG8ca3eR84dF f0ri465C5OLSW6AifH260dErqOwQms42RyK0EVKwxd3/PYT6gwmTmmeAKWndzA6EcFpK ZYVHVz3Pi5s9DPs8oMzonSrmDzgI0vskldJggyzRsmW/5gcl6BHfHetBJAuXkjwTFYch 87qw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531iFF25Oq4uVOZlbHw1IYsNhF2OOxf4bnDXNYiGalzHH34TggJi VoFPRdaDj4xNU/n++cNnJ9ahTNON9zozldElFKs= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyleUHOQ1Dzwsvco4D8Kb6ED8lXDzo42gqSNXB0njsWpLnkEVMEMAkYlMTU9I4fZNhLo+xUhDEMmRjvFVpRMyU= X-Received: by 2002:a25:538a:: with SMTP id h132mr11841975ybb.247.1607871511230; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 06:58:31 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20201128193335.219395-1-masahiroy@kernel.org> <20201212161831.GA28098@roeck-us.net> <8f645b94-80e5-529c-7b6a-d9b8d8c9685e@roeck-us.net> In-Reply-To: <8f645b94-80e5-529c-7b6a-d9b8d8c9685e@roeck-us.net> From: Miguel Ojeda Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2020 15:58:20 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Compiler Attributes: remove CONFIG_ENABLE_MUST_CHECK To: Guenter Roeck Cc: Masahiro Yamada , "Jason A . Donenfeld" , Nathan Chancellor , Nick Desaulniers , Shuah Khan , clang-built-linux , linux-kernel , "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" , Network Development , wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-BeenThere: wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30rc1 Precedence: list List-Id: Development discussion of WireGuard List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: wireguard-bounces@lists.zx2c4.com Sender: "WireGuard" On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 1:55 PM Guenter Roeck wrote: > > Witz komm raus, Du bist umzingelt. Please, explain this reference. :-) > The key here is "if nobody complains". I would argue that it is _your_ > responsibility to do those builds, and not the reponsibility of others > to do it for you. Testing allmodconfig for a popular architecture, agreed, it is due diligence to avoid messing -next that day. Testing a matrix of configs * arches * gcc/clang * compiler versions? No, sorry, that is what CI/-next/-rcs are for and that is where the "if nobody complains" comes from. If you think building a set of code for a given arch/config/etc. is particularly important, then it is _your_ responsibility to build it once in a while in -next (as you have done). If it is not that important, somebody will speak up in one -rc. If not, is anyone actually building that code at all? Otherwise, changing core/shared code would be impossible. Please don't blame the author for making a sensible change that will improve code quality for everyone. > But, sure, your call. Please feel free to ignore my report. I'm not ignoring the report, quite the opposite. I am trying to understand why you think reverting is needed for something that has been more than a week in -next without any major breakage and still has a long road to v5.11. Cheers, Miguel