From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751134AbVKTBp2 (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Nov 2005 20:45:28 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751135AbVKTBp2 (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Nov 2005 20:45:28 -0500 Received: from zproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.162.203]:40350 "EHLO zproxy.gmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751134AbVKTBp2 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Nov 2005 20:45:28 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=Yn/sEjqK5W1UfnZPeF8kTdETBzF7QsPbxpRYBPn8pbEqCVJfobPUIMktTWb1Io4OqXGQysC0SpAP1fvpdwoXenEa6U8XuqowUbIMOIhnfCIOzWNPO7HvJbCyE7ovBBPRaUnRbmOuisZqS6b2/N2hfI7YWdkE6jRhiRXpbbUkrDQ= Message-ID: <9a8748490511191745h6aebd102r91007bc2b84382ff@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 02:45:27 +0100 From: Jesper Juhl To: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH] i386, nmi: signed vs unsigned mixup Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com In-Reply-To: <20051119173358.2bf1dbb5.akpm@osdl.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Disposition: inline References: <200511200010.33658.jesper.juhl@gmail.com> <20051119162805.47796de9.akpm@osdl.org> <9a8748490511191630r3ad3e24w4e6d21b3f3b0c3a7@mail.gmail.com> <20051119170818.5e16afae.akpm@osdl.org> <9a8748490511191715x61057bc8i1431ca3a24cfb2e6@mail.gmail.com> <20051119173358.2bf1dbb5.akpm@osdl.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/20/05, Andrew Morton wrote: > Jesper Juhl wrote: > > > > Ok, so does that mean that, if properly verified, patches for things > > that "gcc -Wsigned-compare" flags will be appreciated? > > All patches are appreciated, but not all are applied ;) > > Sure, go for it - let's see what the patches end up looking like. We might > find real bugs in there - I found a bunch of howlers back in 2.3.late. > That was with `gcc -W' which turns on more than -Wsigned-compare. > > Maybe you could prepare a quick overall summary first, see if you can work > out the overall scope of the problem and then we can take a look at that, > decide what bits to attack? > Sure, I'll do that tomorrow. All these sign issues all over annoy me :) I'll try to get a handle on the scope of the thing tomorrow, then send a mail with what I find, then we can talk about what would be useful to do. -- Jesper Juhl Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html Plain text mails only, please http://www.expita.com/nomime.html