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=-2.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,T_DKIM_INVALID, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham 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 8BA3DC46470 for ; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 09:05:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3690A214C1 for ; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 09:05:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="Tt9VdO+O" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 3690A214C1 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731390AbeHGLTP (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Aug 2018 07:19:15 -0400 Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:46382 "EHLO merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727156AbeHGLTP (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Aug 2018 07:19:15 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=GHm7YnteHhMn41bV2KqfzS8FRKyEYvxzwdAoe1+Tzbk=; b=Tt9VdO+OtRQgTpj0LWKuwKFHh U924TJW7vDmYnHU/4i1iS/npXooQbGzQF9+ZvVZo4rcSJJgXarH86it8CKHuQqgSTxa9I1f1bN1Pc oPnl22EQAJQTg0zZ/zk2MpUWtIeCfNsTPCbSS3/rqeUexLmtbZeHpMajfPduf5303Oy18JXSp/Ghw EoOsfi4X38dJ61x4CHDOJh5qkwWNhCJTsWCbWfvQpDRt/Nk9UA3Xvu6oLwD0ZpbI52QEboj0qZWwo n/HbL6s7XyiS3Itz3dEYsJubIFlmSrTCYpGWlMX77es7QCU5sgGcYMXnAs+0QsfD00gBWgPxerJoK 8oO5UVV3w==; Received: from j217100.upc-j.chello.nl ([24.132.217.100] helo=hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtpsa (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1fmxw3-0007Br-9J; Tue, 07 Aug 2018 09:05:47 +0000 Received: by hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A854520588138; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 11:05:44 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2018 11:05:44 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Fubo Chen Cc: jpoimboe@redhat.com, Ingo Molnar , bhole_prashant_q7@lab.ntt.co.jp, Linux Kernel Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf/x86/intel: Fix unwind errors from PEBS entries (mk-II) Message-ID: <20180807090544.GX2494@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20180719153347.buoe6pavpqc75zbb@treble> <20180719174311.GK2494@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20180719211954.GZ2512@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20180806154235.GO2494@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20180806180423.GC2476@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20180806223008.GW2494@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.0 (2018-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 04:04:40PM -0700, Fubo Chen wrote: > On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 3:30 PM Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 02:28:18PM -0700, Fubo Chen wrote: > > > Do you think the patch below is sufficient to suppress the sparse warning? > > > > Why would I want to make the code ugly to supress it? > > There are many kernel developers who use sparse to verify the > correctness of endianness annotations (__be32, __le32, ...). When > compiling kernel code with sparse every warning that is reported by > sparse should be analyzed. Most kernel developers consider it annoying > having to deal with false positive warnings. So I think that is useful > to suppress false positive sparse warnings if it is possible to > suppress false positives with a reasonable effort. Last time I used sparse there were a metric ton of warnings. I really can't be bothered about one more. Maybe fix sparse if you're bothered?