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 25F30C4361B for ; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 16:32:54 +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 70B32224BD for ; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 16:32:53 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 70B32224BD 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 b84aaea3; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 16:24:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-yb1-xb41.google.com (mail-yb1-xb41.google.com [2607:f8b0:4864:20::b41]) by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTPS id b80e4827 (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256:NO) for ; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 16:24:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-yb1-xb41.google.com with SMTP id w127so13177369ybw.8 for ; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 08:32:50 -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=OOly9loxLYTvtE1Njo5WCf0TNy0xF1kl9c/YUhN9Ldg=; b=CQnFeP/qKJ1PIVVbcikxlOyY0crNPCzCLu36oBQIVFV74Qm25kpqcvPED0RU69ffXH uD6MhZB+lq4W+AwP/iSR1y65ptVYtL2M9m/31Fq2JJPuJWN6yPuvek6A5N6ax9r5UCRw v0A7+nXAqDoI6u2QDgJS/P0XsGWZQKRj7ErAjJubTAV4bU8mufhSSkpu98ZVvUCjUmKH m8l5+M1F6sAbrcTb0c9JMjQIhq3a3okT8zVEj/9CKQSUV3R07tDspVdX2gGqJCSVv6xy 7W5JptzuBD1Rtp0cr87thNuZ5gZd+z6n4BrWRFemSfSqlGvEaVbpoSKchAuRye9qKD9Z moJA== 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=OOly9loxLYTvtE1Njo5WCf0TNy0xF1kl9c/YUhN9Ldg=; b=OOaSSgUY8oVPY9knVTNIQsIgA8FO+FlAnUOKgM/WKjcY9jHb+HV/tf4R6MGNzuGrAh CX+/yFgxDFpM678MGWu4hdUbGcU+yIyZEveHBNCYnquplJy9aFj7ZOeIGPfvIpKRv0BQ j0EtOKgjwuMm9l9eaCN1GGifWSAHxrw/5uDm0vig3oKLiANYFINY+K8K2S3Aw2dWDUPp bQIlopf3Eb0xs0i6QaqVchIpeccKdbafugaxjr6HcPW5++y0CfYUybXgXgLE1ZWc+ZkR I4jkdTGLGx4vSyrRuTuOflZVC3FpSSjgfUEMpe3xf5vGEypc0+azYDf1S0ptFOEQuvJB uD2A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531fzW3n+H/EgcLVE9sMgp5YBF1z0XvRJJjf6F8Xczol62YUl7FE vJKpeqoqfLugLXcatf4JLJAfpRRNGUEVBDRrQVw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzYbmOg9ijb/AZ8TKkK+fOnNQR1Y5LH6RzvAMw7yylGfsj/NGzlkqPYBT43q2CZBUVma+fLSh0qufHXXvXT9TQ= X-Received: by 2002:a25:40d:: with SMTP id 13mr32470818ybe.422.1607877169805; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 08:32:49 -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: From: Miguel Ojeda Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2020 17:32:38 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Compiler Attributes: remove CONFIG_ENABLE_MUST_CHECK To: Matthias Urlichs Cc: Greg KH , Guenter Roeck , 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 4:38 PM 'Matthias Urlichs' via Clang Built Linux wrote: > > If your change to a function breaks its callers, it's your job to fix No function has changed. This patch enables a warning (that for some reason is an error in the case of Guenter). Even if this was a hard error, the same applies: the function hasn't changed. It just means callers never tested with `CONFIG_ENABLE_MUST_CHECK` for *years*. > the callers proactively instead of waiting for "as they come" bug > reports. (Assuming, of course, that you know about the breakage. Which > you do when you tell us that the bad pattern can simply be grepped for.) No, *we don't know about the breakage*. The grep was for the particular function Guenter reported, and done to validate his concern. If you want to manually inspect every caller of every `__must_check` function, or to write a cocci patch or a clang-tidy check or similar (that would be obsolete as soon as `__must_check` is enabled), you are welcome to do so. But a much better usage of our time would be letting machines do their job. > If nothing else, that's far more efficient than [number_of_callers] > separate patches by other people who each need to find the offending > change, figure out what to change and/or who to report the problem to, > and so on until the fix lands in the kernel. This change is not in Linus' tree, it is on -next. > Moreover, this wouldn't leave the kernel sources in a non-bisect-able > state during that time. Again, the change is in -next. That is the point: to do integration testing and let the bots run against it. Cheers, Miguel