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 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 12F9EC433F5 for ; Thu, 13 Jan 2022 20:50:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:44824 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n872u-0007Zr-0Z for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Thu, 13 Jan 2022 15:50:08 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:49586) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n86tz-0006sX-BV for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 13 Jan 2022 15:40:55 -0500 Received: from [2a00:1450:4864:20::335] (port=52038 helo=mail-wm1-x335.google.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n86tx-0007EI-KR for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 13 Jan 2022 15:40:54 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-x335.google.com with SMTP id e5so4746582wmq.1 for ; Thu, 13 Jan 2022 12:40:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Y1DB1apbtxl2D9I9dSyF4ahS5YNjQcFy7BT+6GH72GM=; b=tD127z2wQ3lBjZg0lj5UIHuTSyauU99h0yAMllhHDBbHK5j/KgjwLKbAZ94s87R+Ps yj9grzX8VgqzkAhrbZMr1Nr3Vnq2RdbDmw68rsPQk1BXCc2VvIr+2KDT3zhrtzWbT6EW TbVeobthCoUEE12Pk9GlvM3yCHCIkv0VAlVR4wiO6UWd0cabaV/UVth7ekLF/1toT/Xs rImQhPmL8ls2Sxal1YVICNGkGRYYbZzo7Jfh8ywBTbpa8K5TaraPwJ4Rucchar3ZOCcH ZKroz7AyrwzHSMq7ToazKWFePs05I6lPpPQXmYvDedKaYIU3HPiWwaB1yaU+sKTa7T18 fQRQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Y1DB1apbtxl2D9I9dSyF4ahS5YNjQcFy7BT+6GH72GM=; b=U/hZwVQmo1742Ig72x636T2VKiC3q+3mUZr/5F/YSTDnzG7vf1+2S8ZN6WDemS11LG L04P08+qmAPDgTNiKd9CsXk20b0y2uIcqLycyfcb6GwNu5I6wcUhrNsKM5N+hXjfNz2E Qt8G0lc1QWjdWqqiEQ96qSOLmDFddYIVqYALk0gtjiZsgnPz1vCs1+y3a6ZeKHZIMyWJ KvwL71LXHRfhgj30h+FKZ15Cf2cO1FZveKQM5wIDF9/bMhtlcH3rn0hqB7gtyFJ4PlmL g4K4YZrk9q3u59c1AC9Jl1rhl8G/ywl3Bim6VF6cL2bZGgG1FP+Q/ATCyEgJNbdciMbH OqSg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531PG60s3Mh3UhNyfZT+OMplP8umMSTLw4ef3yRlFIeqqfygTU1O Vw1kkqJkaa7McK71j9yMbSzf63oN20z0jeWC8uXHgg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxQrIwShF2sAInzAm4nuj6smqTipSIZHT8+PjLzXhNNnrWQQgZDK0zVST2d5kO5Kx2+RiImFU09L/R7PmRw5hY= X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:1991:: with SMTP id t17mr12603123wmq.21.1642106452348; Thu, 13 Jan 2022 12:40:52 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220109161923.85683-1-imp@bsdimp.com> <20220109161923.85683-21-imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: From: Peter Maydell Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2022 20:40:41 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 20/30] bsd-user/signal.c: core_dump_signal To: Warner Losh Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Host-Lookup-Failed: Reverse DNS lookup failed for 2a00:1450:4864:20::335 (failed) Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::335; envelope-from=peter.maydell@linaro.org; helo=mail-wm1-x335.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -12 X-Spam_score: -1.3 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Kyle Evans , Stacey Son , QEMU Developers Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Thu, 13 Jan 2022 at 20:28, Warner Losh wrote: > On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 1:22 PM Peter Maydell wrote: >> Code is fine, but since this is a static function with no callers >> the compiler is going to emit a warning about that. It's a small >> function, so the easiest thing is just to squash this into the >> following patch which is what adds the code that calls it. > > > Sure thing. I'm still trying to get a feel for right-sizing the chunking... > Since the warning didn't fail the compile, I thought it would be OK, > but can easily fold this in with the first patch to use it. Ah yes, we don't currently default-enable -Werror for BSD hosts in configure (only for Linux and for mingw32). So in this particular case it doesn't matter much, but we might as well do it the way we would for code that's not BSD-specific. thanks -- PMM