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=-8.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_MED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,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 15EA4C47404 for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 16:41:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D81CB206BB for ; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 16:41:13 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="KdRyUgsn" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731695AbfJIQlM (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Oct 2019 12:41:12 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-f196.google.com ([209.85.210.196]:40162 "EHLO mail-pf1-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1731083AbfJIQlM (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Oct 2019 12:41:12 -0400 Received: by mail-pf1-f196.google.com with SMTP id x127so1965079pfb.7 for ; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 09:41:12 -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; bh=4KCOuyU/ywH5UdEeKKy1ZD5cSa0qM6JRtRuTi6ZEGfg=; b=KdRyUgsnV+XebI3lT10g3MSaM0BW6c17+YU4pUx+2eA+C9am1YEdku6d6tBGCdXm2c W04Hb/MWT6rZjMR+dwzmQq1sDhw8PjMnfxOk6EG4alrLHwtojAXHHcvd1/2vZaNj1ikx 4lIXwa8qgSRdy9uDvik5vjDrWjfTTdwTGAmkqU1AGTC4I3a1alWEbZTXvqYuNB7MgXFh RyMjomorAY5pHNMW1A29VDRSLitZHRhdG0Fz7giZTJXeaiLPM8EHhjTh7a9sVdAkXwni +9xyhywhTJsFJEz/Ely4TDIoHVC0Us0NGQszz6LqNiaUU/Ulh03mZCkJGJkmBMElv0DZ l6aA== 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=4KCOuyU/ywH5UdEeKKy1ZD5cSa0qM6JRtRuTi6ZEGfg=; b=slVITVD2CgBv9zw2ML7U4uCw3V6h5zqRsJJ9GOohtNIuMiZ/ybNrzqoqhfQQ8ZrOyD fv1YklLRvfsfRncJtf90WDF6dfm7Vl6T8DcErLm/vYX2/UKjkiYFMxpVUSVMSWvc860a kWh0OYtlwOE6B3+lweBH7r84nxqAiNiuRksd/KMpRMJKkRoXHSVQ+7PAKKQkfa3kZLVl Cet7KxqBgqF1rgHyK0rcWJjn4Eb1aMTLB3eEU3QkK6xvgmUpxcZer/N0o8NpoPswuF1r LI+REdxx0LlMSWsUAOY778czGwrJdvdNYGN9fwjNajVI+poScOiLD0DPxKYdb2IXKVwO a3pw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWmYbkbDIR8fQZYE9wKejuQvI6ErY7LIVq4EYkqsT4zY91sw1aK EzU6tjwnsjT38L3xQj7XhR0q4CthaX6tsKUhq12Efg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxxtqdLlqdJ+oeX5eyUnxCGbj6bA/T+ZV6iNXBuLdhXsG5XJ83Ds5MVom+4xZBSMAzFV1PS/jlj78IrXr5cH9Y= X-Received: by 2002:a65:464b:: with SMTP id k11mr5449394pgr.263.1570639271341; Wed, 09 Oct 2019 09:41:11 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <75f70e5e-9ece-d6d1-a2c5-2f3ad79b9ccb@web.de> <20191009110943.7ff3a08a@gandalf.local.home> <20191009122735.17415f9c@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <20191009122735.17415f9c@gandalf.local.home> From: Nick Desaulniers Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2019 09:40:59 -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" 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 9:27 AM Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 09:13:17 -0700 > Nick Desaulniers wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 8:09 AM Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > > > > 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. > > Not at all, I was just curious, because I would have expected patches > to fix possible bugs with it. Ah, granted, I was surprised, too. Maybe would be helpful to mention that in the commit message. -- Thanks, ~Nick Desaulniers