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,SPF_PASS 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 C1CF1C433F5 for ; Wed, 8 Sep 2021 13:23:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A37C761164 for ; Wed, 8 Sep 2021 13:23:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1348607AbhIHNYy (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Sep 2021 09:24:54 -0400 Received: from zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk ([142.44.231.140]:50160 "EHLO zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234910AbhIHNYw (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Sep 2021 09:24:52 -0400 Received: from viro by zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1mNxTh-002IXA-72; Wed, 08 Sep 2021 13:19:01 +0000 Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2021 13:19:01 +0000 From: Al Viro To: Guenter Roeck Cc: Arnd Bergmann , Geert Uytterhoeven , Linus Torvalds , "David S. Miller" , Dmitry Torokhov , Christian Koenig , Huang Rui , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-sparc , Martin Sebor Subject: Re: [PATCH] Enable '-Werror' by default for all kernel builds Message-ID: References: <20210906234921.GA1394069@roeck-us.net> <20210908042838.GA2585993@roeck-us.net> <23b3a9ab-7205-9f4e-9425-17506aec3170@roeck-us.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <23b3a9ab-7205-9f4e-9425-17506aec3170@roeck-us.net> Sender: Al Viro Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Sep 08, 2021 at 05:42:30AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > Oddly enough, a memcpy on the 'rtc' variable doesn't fail, > neither with nor without volatile. Something else is going on. While we are at it, would memcpy_fromio() complain? Seeing that this is what's really intended there...