From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5F4774EB865; Wed, 30 Sep 2026 15:03:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790780632; cv=none; b=qoCwoscTcz05LJu3I71QWv8TxA+px1Dk2GFq9D0NigknyXsVs6EJl1bdjZxLu+9EUYbNGvDbQ57iiY2ULPLxJiWFQJs3RDZTJUrrmyK0gk6HWnQKMMDQhtllXQ15hOhEz2plvL9sR5wK/xgqa8DaDQhuUp2qaEvaZ5qbNq34p3o= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790780632; c=relaxed/simple; bh=s/8kkEZhVd0OJzmCH/hPMWUc0/RQEN7qGKZ6w5ctzp8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=CqiPaz7l5Jd1q5oS9v9qrMsOnZkhgDjZd0l8ufdDlZwnYf7m/PXMdzRSyI4KttpK2cSJi66Rhn4Yi0+5VP6pg1Dto5YQ7yqzc2PTm6lk52lCVfNseDfCIkqcKsSYTKaRO8RoxUPWzBFW/L9Q+LuI7S9vZBxImMk8BK31dXr52VU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=hORXiz8R; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="hORXiz8R" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F3E061F000FF; Wed, 30 Sep 2026 15:03:38 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1790780621; bh=Sn5n3WuCVajT+inl+5tBI3yXF1DodX/zSNPkhZCSDKk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=hORXiz8RPe71t9VBoziOt5QDzrqg5lEvWawkXF1ukt0vtpuLuesk5CGTfFN6gxoXk fFsVpeh+/nHgHYe60kV0V4+rhWWm9xd9EbQPdFNwwexIboeliTNnPNl85eiq/lLon1 g+ODgnIpbTCUo59o7/r/CCFH6M6kR4G92FIFeMiiASyE72BKqgVwE20OCJon68MPLm ij04bH17JHvPefJV9rk2S2y0ElCpu1GCm9pizD0hlq9eBFH+4RkvrL98qVFLfYl4oJ lSEgiEzG43X6F36hBs5CmHU4A0mHkuR0G1vON67qYNJQo7/1Rbw3AeftCCZI0Ukn0Z S+F37pvLuEgCg== Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2026 17:03:36 +0200 From: Nathan Chancellor To: Andy Shevchenko Cc: cdcp206@gmail.com, Nuno =?iso-8859-1?Q?S=E1?= , Jonathan Cameron , David Lechner , Andy Shevchenko , Liviu Stan , linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel test robot Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio: temperature: ltc2983: avoid string comparison for leak detector Message-ID: <20260930150336.GC3142230@ax162> References: <20260929-iio-ltc2983-fix-string-compare-v1-1-d67d612d6ddd@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Wed, Sep 30, 2026 at 12:52:16PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > Hmm... I consider that the compiler warning is just a noise which we should > ignore or disable. It's doubtfully useful as if it may prove the always false > or always true cases, it doesn't mean there won't be other cases in the future. > Do we have any discussion on that warning before? I don't think there has been a discussion around -Wstring-compare before. Unfortunately, it seems like clang's -Wstring-compare is different from GCC's -Wstring-compare. clang's is basically a subwarning in GCC's -Waddress and GCC's -Wstring-compare does not really have an equivalent in clang proper (it seems like it might be a clang-tidy check IIUC?): https://godbolt.org/z/zzT4WsoT8 So if we want to disable -Wstring-compare, we should only do it for GCC in my opinion. -- Cheers, Nathan