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=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,URIBL_BLOCKED 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 77668C433ED for ; Tue, 11 May 2021 03:24:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 566ED61494 for ; Tue, 11 May 2021 03:24:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229968AbhEKDZx (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 May 2021 23:25:53 -0400 Received: from mail-lj1-f177.google.com ([209.85.208.177]:36399 "EHLO mail-lj1-f177.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229465AbhEKDZw (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 May 2021 23:25:52 -0400 Received: by mail-lj1-f177.google.com with SMTP id o16so23362877ljp.3; Mon, 10 May 2021 20:24:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:reply-to:to:cc :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date:user-agent :content-transfer-encoding; bh=t5dihwh6taxcRIhzyzPXuTSAxXGXraKDtiK/9X4Jh/Y=; b=JqcF7yLJ1Tp42uiWQltIBHjIKDzcN8bYpR3dzB7Uo0lE7CBjXyMuirE1ni7OVTZ8HN IbGpnmbrJME2NEw8lw1CGmfzKORKqGa0vKNdquU43OcP3nEEQFkrJ7XTqX2NGs9q9dA/ QjVRTbU5dR6iG8sY3N55lAgTbXOqO/WZnpaBB3aG2wZlvbHFD7+3NwLm6R8boJqPtI9a zCUxdKy6JkKmOWqVxTz7Iwqxg3Dc+8TlYn8Mxah9ua/nmSeiTdHV0buJaAC8nyRyeH3d 14NJZGIXyLPmxUM7xW2e3We7311Sb94bp6t2TaZkZ2qVKgnIwXf358rV66fhbCzKSN7t MGLA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531iFfpQbCV5R2rncKOBAUq2r00MdVhWSVxXQ99qphUgD+PNeF8S syB05KsIK1D8SLOYulzAfXblsJT619JtMw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwD3l/iF8tqr97idrVOmnyHS3NJ37MZAL/xw4/7kF3eFrOciG1X6h4w5Okm/ESeb7iU1NJe6A== X-Received: by 2002:a2e:9dc3:: with SMTP id x3mr23213877ljj.206.1620703484941; Mon, 10 May 2021 20:24:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dc7vkhyyyyyyyyyyyyyby-3.rev.dnainternet.fi (dc7vkhyyyyyyyyyyyyyby-3.rev.dnainternet.fi. [2001:14ba:16e2:8300::2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f22sm835673lfc.102.2021.05.10.20.24.44 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 10 May 2021 20:24:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <6121a55d7db8cc4376c068e289fb29b9d4479dbd.camel@fi.rohmeurope.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 05/10] regulator: IRQ based event/error notification helpers From: Matti Vaittinen Reply-To: matti.vaittinen@fi.rohmeurope.com To: Andy Shevchenko , kernel test robot Cc: kbuild-all@lists.01.org, Mark Brown , Kees Cook , Zhang Rui , Guenter Roeck , "agross@kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , linux-power , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" In-Reply-To: References: <202105110342.Oembupaq-lkp@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 11 May 2021 06:24:32 +0300 User-Agent: Evolution 3.34.4 (3.34.4-1.fc31) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Andy, All, On Mon, 2021-05-10 at 23:20 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 10:46 PM kernel test robot > wrote: > > > > include/linux/bitops.h:35:2: warning: this 'for' clause does not > > guard... [-Wmisleading-indentation] > > 35 | for ((bit) = find_first_bit((addr), (size)); \ > > | ^~~ > > drivers/regulator/irq_helpers.c:242:3: note: in expansion of > > macro 'for_each_set_bit' > > 242 | for_each_set_bit(j, &stat->notifs, BITS_PER_TYPE(stat- > > >notifs)) > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > drivers/regulator/irq_helpers.c:244:4: note: ...this statement, > > but the latter is misleadingly indented as if it were guarded by > > the 'for' > > Seems like missed {} > > Matti, there is a serious question: how had you tested this... I actually did. I did not just run rebase for the series and threw new version but I actually did run this in real HW, with real break-out board and with a fresh info print to see the event being sent. > (besides obvious compilation error) > Perhaps you have to fix your process somewhere to avoid missing > important steps? Yes. Can't deny this. And process fix should be simple. If code/patch needs a change (even a print removal/print severity change/parameter change) - then it needs to be tested again prior formatting the patches. Sorry folks. --Matti