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=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,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 B5C0AC433FE for ; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 15:17:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D59823123 for ; Sun, 13 Dec 2020 15:17:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2437028AbgLMPRn (ORCPT ); Sun, 13 Dec 2020 10:17:43 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:56466 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730018AbgLMPR3 (ORCPT ); Sun, 13 Dec 2020 10:17:29 -0500 Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2020 16:16:45 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1607872608; bh=pEiuqB9pAZbrN292hjKDbjBh1bbQUpVOf/f5lPhZzEQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=papV6FLD96BXoyZOlsI0R1TlvUIoPV0HQeU0lnGtnjJk8+YRXUXA+niGSE1bP6Xvy TTAiaNjzJZW0WZBiihNbrUyKExm0BwxfruvL820O0gxSl4TX9g93CjevSQCGbnFlnQ RvWwI52nWFjn3nBMyuzoK7ZpoMtaqMtoTL/6Bg1g= From: Greg KH To: Miguel Ojeda Cc: Guenter Roeck , Masahiro Yamada , "Jason A . Donenfeld" , Nathan Chancellor , Nick Desaulniers , Shuah Khan , clang-built-linux , linux-kernel , "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" , Network Development , wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Compiler Attributes: remove CONFIG_ENABLE_MUST_CHECK Message-ID: References: <20201128193335.219395-1-masahiroy@kernel.org> <20201212161831.GA28098@roeck-us.net> <8f645b94-80e5-529c-7b6a-d9b8d8c9685e@roeck-us.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 03:58:20PM +0100, Miguel Ojeda wrote: > > The key here is "if nobody complains". I would argue that it is _your_ > > responsibility to do those builds, and not the reponsibility of others > > to do it for you. > > Testing allmodconfig for a popular architecture, agreed, it is due > diligence to avoid messing -next that day. > > Testing a matrix of configs * arches * gcc/clang * compiler versions? > No, sorry, that is what CI/-next/-rcs are for and that is where the > "if nobody complains" comes from. > > If you think building a set of code for a given arch/config/etc. is > particularly important, then it is _your_ responsibility to build it > once in a while in -next (as you have done). If it is not that > important, somebody will speak up in one -rc. If not, is anyone > actually building that code at all? > > Otherwise, changing core/shared code would be impossible. Please don't > blame the author for making a sensible change that will improve code > quality for everyone. > > > But, sure, your call. Please feel free to ignore my report. > > I'm not ignoring the report, quite the opposite. I am trying to > understand why you think reverting is needed for something that has > been more than a week in -next without any major breakage and still > has a long road to v5.11. Because if you get a report of something breaking for your change, you need to work to resolve it, not argue about it. Otherwise it needs to be dropped/reverted. Please fix. thanks, greg k-h