From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.9]) (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 04F30222585 for ; Fri, 16 May 2025 09:07:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.9 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1747386440; cv=none; b=HhnIrsQ66dXqBsGA6b+hHcvshNB3HzJXzF6QeTP5PupzRWuXMYL7ODGOlcIdDO+6vO6nHjDHlwtJ9FBaY0P1J26PRk8A2GLEFSOXSP9p0DoDcHX+cyukAMx2RLfDp6FkNLQRCVS0456hb/Auu95EPrfhzrVwBVpaXFTXnMKynNQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1747386440; c=relaxed/simple; bh=woPyfxXdUkhsMAmUUBKTxPdGncf9X3NZSxD45aa20LQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=LoIrfHd19LMFwxHVofHaMo9gScrd6k/9S/YdV510T3+65S0Ifx9UAbCyI9+hu0fFT6gPDtIGzYLM5s9Imw/CrRl1Y7RpfGdZmZRYNsiDHjegnNBr7KtZc1JujxiXGQG3uqVH3k0cezeRUkYH7u7Pv3EGeh+tKQdwAJDuJR44j6k= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=TmeGG0rf; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.9 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="TmeGG0rf" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1747386439; x=1778922439; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=woPyfxXdUkhsMAmUUBKTxPdGncf9X3NZSxD45aa20LQ=; b=TmeGG0rf6iYcnG/AEgYPA330xQHBRGsECfB+0sSwVx/AWoczyz60fBPP N/1vJ9Lbr5qG+ecItZhPtViH6m3ms06PEhixDcGZq7fqj1nEpTzJ/Hk79 SbQ+KmoxCumz7hYXTisSvOHWRbQpBB6uJxAEx1Lu2HJe5JNYzQjYSmRLZ lcuzAf9nitJZj8nJlG3AlhCgpyfXZnPSecQS7xzAr6NoF4uOMdtHP05y9 ++6nDAIc/kmtliAfQw9CJrMZZNj8pXvA4bR3v5/N9bEs5yQWzj9V+xWOt rlpl9+za9dL7rsdrXXR6mn691HtDadJET1vN55SS9a9OqaZHZecqmDjO5 w==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: aDtUXqcwSy21f2dhhQSU3w== X-CSE-MsgGUID: pDItIQmPTMOAQ9GXV9/lng== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11434"; a="60009178" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.15,293,1739865600"; d="scan'208";a="60009178" Received: from fmviesa010.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.150]) by fmvoesa103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 May 2025 02:07:15 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: Vh/JjJRiQRO8isXGKGKcWw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: xve/MdAuSVi4LMseb/oVzA== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.15,293,1739865600"; d="scan'208";a="139119554" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.52]) by fmviesa010.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 May 2025 02:07:13 -0700 Received: from andy by smile.fi.intel.com with local (Exim 4.98.2) (envelope-from ) id 1uFr27-000000025mv-2N38; Fri, 16 May 2025 12:07:11 +0300 Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 12:07:11 +0300 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Jiri Slaby Cc: Thomas Gleixner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel test robot Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] genirq: Bump the size of the local variable for sprintf() Message-ID: References: <20250515085516.2913290-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> <0e79e48c-f466-41f7-bb60-03f45f6b0628@kernel.org> 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: <0e79e48c-f466-41f7-bb60-03f45f6b0628@kernel.org> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 06:45:04AM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote: > On 15. 05. 25, 10:55, Andy Shevchenko wrote: ... > > - char name [10]; > > + char name [12]; > > The max irq is ~ 512000, if I am counting correctly, so 7 B should be > actually enough for everybody ;). GCC can't proved it. And FWIW, on current Debian unstable (GCC 14?) I can't reproduce this. In any case this doesn't increase stack usage AFAICT, the array already have reserved 12 or 16 bytes. > But well, can we silence the warning in a better way? I doubt that... With the above said, I think it's pretty much close to the best way. But if you find anything better, I also would like to learn. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko