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=-11.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_MED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL 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 7E716ECE58C for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 16:13:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54150218DE for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 16:13:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="EqoIt1h2" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731593AbfJIQNb (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Oct 2019 12:13:31 -0400 Received: from mail-pg1-f193.google.com ([209.85.215.193]:35832 "EHLO mail-pg1-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1731426AbfJIQNa (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Oct 2019 12:13:30 -0400 Received: by mail-pg1-f193.google.com with SMTP id p30so1720393pgl.2 for ; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 09:13:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=c47qbrSLLIGvUFt5MXsNztJFq0VL1S5Chm3p/SDAdyg=; b=EqoIt1h2PDX7vbfae8AJX5+I4HC6Gk8kl3tB8yyytrR6muGw6bUAKdUrwRTTRciyOc 5JAaJBNXH0afOQ/y1srk/nOrZYMA7SitU4EXessmNx2E2LvYGeN5YWB9E1g9VpvBi5Qg Heu2lsW9dReZSr+18lwS2AVry3IK5pN0cUYumY1zY7mwqxYHr9UgK7xjUBNnKH5tuCwV 7ot7Xfz95MR9DgD80amwXFTtohgg8bfdfCs3VC5YQFZ+sMkYFrLY6gFNgJLG1fb5FbW2 UR9kDDOg4Wlk7pTEMQYVbCJsPEoDiif+FVUVbUremIRYyZUBKrqtcDbjwYrHgj3CVNU1 yRuw== 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:content-transfer-encoding; bh=c47qbrSLLIGvUFt5MXsNztJFq0VL1S5Chm3p/SDAdyg=; b=jERYsn1OEJnxgz5NhmsUrLfy/WiIFroZk2RaSfXo4DaZk78dUhIRNLeJ5tsF7ij1o9 Ph6ge/VDTD50MamnV+4ayl/LlaSKGZv2r7AVrDhZNmKN4r1VzVzG+D9LxBAUDoKS0ewt 5L+liY/kQdSlHrYO0jWoQrhqC1ab5JbHIVSh7tzKryIii0LXW8wxYsfAtUxG17ed5+iN pbHdqxGj71omfsjA9v6q5EjwEo1C5JVgvGq6EFC9xcc2OA3KWq7Skbra7IUfWEML4+x8 TGniRBxwE292veHBtemg3H7LdiZlcZgw6F5s6cuIgYIWnUVEiZ9x6kyVGVtPcbZtYZSE 9wIQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXOPrPwW/g94PT8qsWX6vR5guUr+7o1JGqrBp7cSek5uXcD6D/q 2l4Ae81rLm753ezjxZ4PQHY0MpjG0En+tP5aPG1qGhi4 X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxLyT5YvYlsd+Ut7uCgK3TewVURguI1L+P+j6SbeZGD2B+eX5eQBTsw0b/K/ahpodvnAwT/Veh1PiFi/Ial8Sw= X-Received: by 2002:a63:5a03:: with SMTP id o3mr5108717pgb.381.1570637609432; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 09:13:29 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <75f70e5e-9ece-d6d1-a2c5-2f3ad79b9ccb@web.de> <20191009110943.7ff3a08a@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <20191009110943.7ff3a08a@gandalf.local.home> From: Nick Desaulniers Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2019 09:13:17 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] string.h: Mark 34 functions with __must_check To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Markus Elfring , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, Alexander Shishkin , Andrew Morton , Andy Shevchenko , Joe Perches , Kees Cook , LKML Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 8:09 AM Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 14:14:28 +0200 > Markus Elfring wrote: > > > From: Markus Elfring > > Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2019 13:53:59 +0200 > > > > Several functions return values with which useful data processing > > should be performed. These values must not be ignored then. > > Thus use the annotation =E2=80=9C__must_check=E2=80=9D in the shown fun= ction declarations. > > > > Add also corresponding parameter names for adjusted functions. > > > > Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring > > > > I'm curious. How many warnings showed up when you applied this patch? I got zero for x86_64 and arm64 defconfig builds of linux-next with this applied. Hopefully that's not an argument against the more liberal application of it? I view __must_check as a good thing, and encourage its application, unless someone can show that a certain function would be useful to call without it. --=20 Thanks, ~Nick Desaulniers