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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1FDDC77B7F for ; Sat, 20 May 2023 07:34:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230262AbjETHeg (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 May 2023 03:34:36 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:51642 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229654AbjETHee (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 May 2023 03:34:34 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-x42d.google.com (mail-pf1-x42d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::42d]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5FD6119F; Sat, 20 May 2023 00:34:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf1-x42d.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-64d3578c25bso1609887b3a.3; Sat, 20 May 2023 00:34:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1684568073; x=1687160073; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=wBXlPJ2WOFDTyTHyLQ9M5/vOMvc7Mykf2q4oVdOVeEg=; b=QN6XoqWxTSy3GlTXwrZ/aRy5SVogCyExaBhpUYS1aG7Mq5WOb3qX89yDQW8ui6jALU bbgFOuA1cNZJjGOuz1NMI+TgiAvv8r+7u4GoJbQ/p40sdOef28WYQn5FJQsFXbtVkGDm SX52G9VZgX+PVbKjFyJ7NzW8uysNXhnSRHv/pWPAGBJcV90ve/ITlbXMgbPfhEEehLdS yOXFaDq9UrMxxK9Ddi4FhGa3KlEDmLTFJGylHHfigZTp9Vtx6Cdn3h8lgnVfIEHEjfIu O/TCrxI/eZzHhH4oqB0CX6HqHyqAINBdChpbtn26Owd3g88VwyG5oE4+njobqdVbxS0v 3PsQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1684568073; x=1687160073; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=wBXlPJ2WOFDTyTHyLQ9M5/vOMvc7Mykf2q4oVdOVeEg=; b=HD45ePTKeXE+cSJlRRn1aN1sOsCM7O4cw5X2IVcWgcgtnYe5dQKbFJ5jQFt2uiS2zV ryZ7Kieo5VmgFL0F2U3WlACuoUFt2M+tp7/iRrrPcq8k9Brx9PL93rGlvATASUFlln0h lKlbnjswGOFMRuRTzlSf/jO58JHjRl8y3yzix26z5V3uEjAa/vvodNRlYlvsyik26hz4 9vz1iURgU+uBxYpdjjmf4s++d5kRFTW0MThBxnk3cnk17k6HoP1LPfnIb+Qf6BhSbToP n1sgLYN20oYABNaiT9E4Z8izOblilCjATGGl5paE7gsRdKyptIGbfpxi2aH5l7dTImWS WWDw== X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDzvQiB1adB5Bq4/UmTF0cqq18K/E+JH/80ZXpEvoM0Ql2CBMYbx g1YI4IJd6AHsP5T1wCxOZIc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ5QxeqwpmX+8bEEsL5MfjtiJ1O/rhGic4E6owcjthl0YEtN976ophiU97AJmOE0F6GQ6X+Lyw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:2e87:b0:636:f899:46a0 with SMTP id fd7-20020a056a002e8700b00636f89946a0mr7194401pfb.15.1684568072820; Sat, 20 May 2023 00:34:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ubuntu777.domain.name (36-228-97-28.dynamic-ip.hinet.net. [36.228.97.28]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id fe21-20020a056a002f1500b0064d47cd117esm499146pfb.39.2023.05.20.00.34.30 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 20 May 2023 00:34:32 -0700 (PDT) From: Min-Hua Chen To: kuba@kernel.org Cc: alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, joabreu@synopsys.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com, mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com, minhuadotchen@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, peppe.cavallaro@st.com, simon.horman@corigine.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] net: stmmac: compare p->des0 and p->des1 with __le32 type values Date: Sat, 20 May 2023 15:34:28 +0800 Message-Id: <20230520073428.3781-1-minhuadotchen@gmail.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.34.1 In-Reply-To: <20230519210439.4a3bb326@kernel.org> References: <20230519210439.4a3bb326@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Jakub, >We can make working with sparse easier by making sure it doesn't >generate false positive warnings :\ It will be good if sparse can handle this case correctly. > >> (There are around 7000 sparse warning in ARCH=arm64 defconfig build and >> sometimes it is hard to remember all the false alarm cases) >> >> Could you consider taking this patch, please? > >No. We don't take patches to address false positive static >checker warnings. No problem. thanks, Min-Hua