[RFC Outreachy] Leftoverbits, which involve replacing atoi with strtol or strtol_i or equivalent.

[RFC Outreachy] Leftoverbits, which involve replacing atoi with strtol or strtol_i or equivalent.

[Usman Akinyemi]

Hello,

I was looking at some #leftoverbits which I can work on and I came
across this conversation.
https://public-inbox.org/git/CAC4O8c-nuOTS=a0sVp1603KaM2bZjs+yNZzdAaa5CGTNGFE7hQ@mail.gmail.com/

I followed the conversation and came accross
three instances where I think atoi can be
converted to strtol or strtol_i or parse_timestamp().
These are the three files which I think the atoi can be
replaced with.

merge-ll.c

something like this can be replace with
if (check->items[1].value) {
  marker_size = atoi(check->items[1].value);
  if (marker_size <= 0)
    marker_size = DEFAULT_CONFLICT_MARKER_SIZE;
}

if (check->items[1].value) {
    char *endptr;
    long temp_marker_size = strtol(check->items[1].value, &endptr, 10);

    // Check for conversion errors
    if (endptr == check->items[1].value || *endptr != '\0' ||
temp_marker_size <= 0) {
        marker_size = DEFAULT_CONFLICT_MARKER_SIZE; // Set to default on error
    } else {
        marker_size = (int)temp_marker_size;
    }
}

alternative is to use strtol_i here which I think is more neater.
if (check->items[1].value) {
    if (strtol_i(check->items[1].value, 10, &marker_size) != 0 ||
marker_size <= 0) {
        marker_size = DEFAULT_CONFLICT_MARKER_SIZE;
    }
}


daemon.c
if (skip_prefix(arg, "--timeout=", &v)) {
  timeout = atoi(v);
  continue;
}
if (skip_prefix(arg, "--init-timeout=", &v)) {
  init_timeout = atoi(v);
  continue;
}
if (skip_prefix(arg, "--max-connections=", &v)) {
  max_connections = atoi(v);
  if (max_connections < 0)
    max_connections = 0;         /* unlimited */
  continue;
}


if (skip_prefix(arg, "--timeout=", &v)) {
    timeout = parse_age(v);
    continue;
}

if (skip_prefix(arg, "--init-timeout=", &v)) {
    init_timeout = parse_age(v);
    continue;
}

if (skip_prefix(arg, "--max-connections=", &v)) {
    // Use strtol_i to convert the string to an integer
    if (strtol_i(v, 10, &max_connections) != 0 || max_connections < 0) {
        max_connections = 0; // Set to default on error
    }
    continue;
}

imap-send.c

if (!strcmp("UIDVALIDITY", arg)) {
  if (!(arg = next_arg(&s)) || !(ctx->uidvalidity = atoi(arg))) {
    fprintf(stderr, "IMAP error: malformed UIDVALIDITY status\n");
    return RESP_BAD;
  }
} else if (!strcmp("UIDNEXT", arg)) {
  if (!(arg = next_arg(&s)) || !(imap->uidnext = atoi(arg))) {
    fprintf(stderr, "IMAP error: malformed NEXTUID status\n");
    return RESP_BAD;
  }
} else if (!strcmp("CAPABILITY", arg)) {
  parse_capability(imap, s);
} else if (!strcmp("ALERT", arg)) {
  /* RFC2060 says that these messages MUST be displayed
   * to the user
   */
  for (; isspace((unsigned char)*p); p++);
  fprintf(stderr, "*** IMAP ALERT *** %s\n", p);
} else if (cb && cb->ctx && !strcmp("APPENDUID", arg)) {
  if (!(arg = next_arg(&s)) || !(ctx->uidvalidity = atoi(arg)) ||
      !(arg = next_arg(&s)) || !(*(int *)cb->ctx = atoi(arg))) {
    fprintf(stderr, "IMAP error: malformed APPENDUID status\n");
    return RESP_BAD;
  }
}

proposed one using strtol_i and I think instead of using strtol_i here, we can
have another custom function that indicate what cause the UIDVALIDITY
to be malformed
either overflow, letter etc

if (!strcmp("UIDVALIDITY", arg)) {
    if (!(arg = next_arg(&s)) || strtol_i(arg, 10, &ctx->uidvalidity) != 0) {
        fprintf(stderr, "IMAP error: malformed UIDVALIDITY status\n");
        return RESP_BAD;
    }


} else if (!strcmp("UIDNEXT", arg)) {
    if (!(arg = next_arg(&s)) || strtol_i(arg, 10, &imap->uidnext) != 0) {
        fprintf(stderr, "IMAP error: malformed NEXTUID status\n");
        return RESP_BAD;
    }

} else if (!strcmp("CAPABILITY", arg)) {
    parse_capability(imap, s);
} else if (!strcmp("ALERT", arg)) {
    // RFC2060 says that these messages MUST be displayed to the user
    for (; isspace((unsigned char)*p); p++);
    fprintf(stderr, "*** IMAP ALERT *** %s\n", p);
} else if (cb && cb->ctx && !strcmp("APPENDUID", arg)) {
    if (!(arg = next_arg(&s)) ||
        (strtol_i(arg, 10, &ctx->uidvalidity) != 0) ||
        !(arg = next_arg(&s)) ||
        (strtol_i(arg, 10, (int *)cb->ctx) != 0)) {

        fprintf(stderr, "IMAP error: malformed APPENDUID status\n");
        return RESP_BAD;
    }
}

- Another instance inside imap-send.c
} else {
    tag = atoi(arg);
    for (pcmdp = &imap->in_progress; (cmdp = *pcmdp); pcmdp = &cmdp->next)
        if (cmdp->tag == tag)
            goto gottag;
    fprintf(stderr, "IMAP error: unexpected tag %s\n", arg);
    return RESP_BAD;
}

- Possible solution.

} else {
    int tag_result; // Variable to hold the result of strtol_i
    if (strtol_i(arg, 10, &tag_result) != 0) {
        fprintf(stderr, "IMAP error: malformed tag %s\n", arg);
        return RESP_BAD;
    }

    // Now use the valid tag_result
    for (pcmdp = &imap->in_progress; (cmdp = *pcmdp); pcmdp = &cmdp->next)
        if (cmdp->tag == tag_result)
            goto gottag;

    fprintf(stderr, "IMAP error: unexpected tag %s\n", arg);
    return RESP_BAD;
}

Thank you.
Usman Akinyemi.

Re: [RFC Outreachy] Leftoverbits, which involve replacing atoi with strtol or strtol_i or equivalent.

[Taylor Blau]

Hi Usman,

On Sat, Oct 12, 2024 at 11:21:13AM +0000, Usman Akinyemi wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I was looking at some #leftoverbits which I can work on and I came
> across this conversation.
> https://public-inbox.org/git/CAC4O8c-nuOTS=a0sVp1603KaM2bZjs+yNZzdAaa5CGTNGFE7hQ@mail.gmail.com/
>
> I followed the conversation and came accross
> three instances where I think atoi can be
> converted to strtol or strtol_i or parse_timestamp().
> These are the three files which I think the atoi can be
> replaced with.

This seems like a good #leftoverbits to use as an Outreachy
contribution. From a brief skim, it looks like this is going in the
right direction.

But to get help from the rest of the list, please submit this change as
a patch or patch series, following the instructions in:

  - Documentation/MyFirstContribution.txt, and
  - Documentation/SubmittingPatches

Thanks,
Taylor

Re: [RFC Outreachy] Leftoverbits, which involve replacing atoi with strtol or strtol_i or equivalent.

[Usman Akinyemi]

On Sat, Oct 12, 2024 at 3:56 PM Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Usman,
>
> On Sat, Oct 12, 2024 at 11:21:13AM +0000, Usman Akinyemi wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I was looking at some #leftoverbits which I can work on and I came
> > across this conversation.
> > https://public-inbox.org/git/CAC4O8c-nuOTS=a0sVp1603KaM2bZjs+yNZzdAaa5CGTNGFE7hQ@mail.gmail.com/
> >
> > I followed the conversation and came accross
> > three instances where I think atoi can be
> > converted to strtol or strtol_i or parse_timestamp().
> > These are the three files which I think the atoi can be
> > replaced with.
>
> This seems like a good #leftoverbits to use as an Outreachy
> contribution. From a brief skim, it looks like this is going in the
> right direction.
>
> But to get help from the rest of the list, please submit this change as
> a patch or patch series, following the instructions in:
>
>   - Documentation/MyFirstContribution.txt, and
>   - Documentation/SubmittingPatches
>
Thanks Taylor, I already went through these as I already sent my first
patch before.  Also, I already sent a patch as you suggested. Thank
you very much.
Usman Akinyemi.
> Thanks,
> Taylor

Re: [RFC Outreachy] Leftoverbits, which involve replacing atoi with strtol or strtol_i or equivalent.

[Taylor Blau]

On Sun, Oct 13, 2024 at 03:46:05AM +0000, Usman Akinyemi wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 12, 2024 at 3:56 PM Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Usman,
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 12, 2024 at 11:21:13AM +0000, Usman Akinyemi wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I was looking at some #leftoverbits which I can work on and I came
> > > across this conversation.
> > > https://public-inbox.org/git/CAC4O8c-nuOTS=a0sVp1603KaM2bZjs+yNZzdAaa5CGTNGFE7hQ@mail.gmail.com/
> > >
> > > I followed the conversation and came accross
> > > three instances where I think atoi can be
> > > converted to strtol or strtol_i or parse_timestamp().
> > > These are the three files which I think the atoi can be
> > > replaced with.
> >
> > This seems like a good #leftoverbits to use as an Outreachy
> > contribution. From a brief skim, it looks like this is going in the
> > right direction.
> >
> > But to get help from the rest of the list, please submit this change as
> > a patch or patch series, following the instructions in:
> >
> >   - Documentation/MyFirstContribution.txt, and
> >   - Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> >
> Thanks Taylor, I already went through these as I already sent my first
> patch before.  Also, I already sent a patch as you suggested. Thank
> you very much.
> Usman Akinyemi.

I must be missing something... I don't see any patches from you that
touch e.g., merge-ll.c, which is the first file you mention in this
thread.

Try searching the list archive for:

  f:'Usman Akinyemi' dfn:merge-ll.c

Is this different from the other patches you have sent to the list? My
apologies if I am missing something here.

Thanks,
Taylor

Re: [RFC Outreachy] Leftoverbits, which involve replacing atoi with strtol or strtol_i or equivalent.

[Usman Akinyemi]

On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 12:42 AM Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Oct 13, 2024 at 03:46:05AM +0000, Usman Akinyemi wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 12, 2024 at 3:56 PM Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Usman,
> > >
> > > On Sat, Oct 12, 2024 at 11:21:13AM +0000, Usman Akinyemi wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > I was looking at some #leftoverbits which I can work on and I came
> > > > across this conversation.
> > > > https://public-inbox.org/git/CAC4O8c-nuOTS=a0sVp1603KaM2bZjs+yNZzdAaa5CGTNGFE7hQ@mail.gmail.com/
> > > >
> > > > I followed the conversation and came accross
> > > > three instances where I think atoi can be
> > > > converted to strtol or strtol_i or parse_timestamp().
> > > > These are the three files which I think the atoi can be
> > > > replaced with.
> > >
> > > This seems like a good #leftoverbits to use as an Outreachy
> > > contribution. From a brief skim, it looks like this is going in the
> > > right direction.
> > >
> > > But to get help from the rest of the list, please submit this change as
> > > a patch or patch series, following the instructions in:
> > >
> > >   - Documentation/MyFirstContribution.txt, and
> > >   - Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> > >
> > Thanks Taylor, I already went through these as I already sent my first
> > patch before.  Also, I already sent a patch as you suggested. Thank
> > you very much.
> > Usman Akinyemi.
>
> I must be missing something... I don't see any patches from you that
> touch e.g., merge-ll.c, which is the first file you mention in this
> thread.
>
> Try searching the list archive for:
>
>   f:'Usman Akinyemi' dfn:merge-ll.c
>
> Is this different from the other patches you have sent to the list? My
> apologies if I am missing something here.
>
> Thanks,
> Taylor
Hi, Taylor

Thanks for the reply. There is a little confusion going on.

This is what happened. I had two patches which are entirely different
from this leftoverbit. Both has been reviewed by other maintainer and
integrated into seen by Junio through
https://github.com/git/git/commit/4dae47e02757333b7d6a6508e36ccb5463b6ad92
 and https://github.com/git/git/commit/dfdc6a71e76c7a1dab22fc9d9e437c858cfea6dc.
I submitted this leftoverbit patch but I made the mistake of basing it
on top of the previous branch which I use for the two above commits.
This is the commit which has the leftoverbit and the previous two
commits which have already been integrated into seen.
https://public-inbox.org/git/pull.1810.git.git.1728774574.gitgitgadget@gmail.com/T/#t
That is the reason why you saw it again. Also, I noticed you also
integrated the two patches again into seen and gave some comments. I
think that might not be needed again. Thank you.

Re: [RFC Outreachy] Leftoverbits, which involve replacing atoi with strtol or strtol_i or equivalent.

[Usman Akinyemi]

On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 3:49 AM Usman Akinyemi
<usmanakinyemi202@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 12:42 AM Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Oct 13, 2024 at 03:46:05AM +0000, Usman Akinyemi wrote:
> > > On Sat, Oct 12, 2024 at 3:56 PM Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Usman,
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Oct 12, 2024 at 11:21:13AM +0000, Usman Akinyemi wrote:
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > I was looking at some #leftoverbits which I can work on and I came
> > > > > across this conversation.
> > > > > https://public-inbox.org/git/CAC4O8c-nuOTS=a0sVp1603KaM2bZjs+yNZzdAaa5CGTNGFE7hQ@mail.gmail.com/
> > > > >
> > > > > I followed the conversation and came accross
> > > > > three instances where I think atoi can be
> > > > > converted to strtol or strtol_i or parse_timestamp().
> > > > > These are the three files which I think the atoi can be
> > > > > replaced with.
> > > >
> > > > This seems like a good #leftoverbits to use as an Outreachy
> > > > contribution. From a brief skim, it looks like this is going in the
> > > > right direction.
> > > >
> > > > But to get help from the rest of the list, please submit this change as
> > > > a patch or patch series, following the instructions in:
> > > >
> > > >   - Documentation/MyFirstContribution.txt, and
> > > >   - Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> > > >
> > > Thanks Taylor, I already went through these as I already sent my first
> > > patch before.  Also, I already sent a patch as you suggested. Thank
> > > you very much.
> > > Usman Akinyemi.
> >
> > I must be missing something... I don't see any patches from you that
> > touch e.g., merge-ll.c, which is the first file you mention in this
> > thread.
> >
> > Try searching the list archive for:
> >
> >   f:'Usman Akinyemi' dfn:merge-ll.c
> >
> > Is this different from the other patches you have sent to the list? My
> > apologies if I am missing something here.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Taylor
> Hi, Taylor
>
> Thanks for the reply. There is a little confusion going on.
>
> This is what happened. I had two patches which are entirely different
> from this leftoverbit. Both has been reviewed by other maintainer and
> integrated into seen by Junio through
> https://github.com/git/git/commit/4dae47e02757333b7d6a6508e36ccb5463b6ad92
>  and https://github.com/git/git/commit/dfdc6a71e76c7a1dab22fc9d9e437c858cfea6dc.
> I submitted this leftoverbit patch but I made the mistake of basing it
> on top of the previous branch which I use for the two above commits.
> This is the commit which has the leftoverbit and the previous two
> commits which have already been integrated into seen.
> https://public-inbox.org/git/pull.1810.git.git.1728774574.gitgitgadget@gmail.com/T/#t
> That is the reason why you saw it again. Also, I noticed you also
> integrated the two patches again into seen and gave some comments. I
> think that might not be needed again. Thank you.
I meant for those particular two patches, since it is integrated into
seen already,
I can probably wait for it to be merged then work on the review which
you gave or what do you think should be done ?
Thank you.

Re: [RFC Outreachy] Leftoverbits, which involve replacing atoi with strtol or strtol_i or equivalent.

[Usman Akinyemi]

On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 3:54 AM Usman Akinyemi
<usmanakinyemi202@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 3:49 AM Usman Akinyemi
> <usmanakinyemi202@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 12:42 AM Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sun, Oct 13, 2024 at 03:46:05AM +0000, Usman Akinyemi wrote:
> > > > On Sat, Oct 12, 2024 at 3:56 PM Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Usman,
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, Oct 12, 2024 at 11:21:13AM +0000, Usman Akinyemi wrote:
> > > > > > Hello,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I was looking at some #leftoverbits which I can work on and I came
> > > > > > across this conversation.
> > > > > > https://public-inbox.org/git/CAC4O8c-nuOTS=a0sVp1603KaM2bZjs+yNZzdAaa5CGTNGFE7hQ@mail.gmail.com/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I followed the conversation and came accross
> > > > > > three instances where I think atoi can be
> > > > > > converted to strtol or strtol_i or parse_timestamp().
> > > > > > These are the three files which I think the atoi can be
> > > > > > replaced with.
> > > > >
> > > > > This seems like a good #leftoverbits to use as an Outreachy
> > > > > contribution. From a brief skim, it looks like this is going in the
> > > > > right direction.
> > > > >
> > > > > But to get help from the rest of the list, please submit this change as
> > > > > a patch or patch series, following the instructions in:
> > > > >
> > > > >   - Documentation/MyFirstContribution.txt, and
> > > > >   - Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> > > > >
> > > > Thanks Taylor, I already went through these as I already sent my first
> > > > patch before.  Also, I already sent a patch as you suggested. Thank
> > > > you very much.
> > > > Usman Akinyemi.
> > >
> > > I must be missing something... I don't see any patches from you that
> > > touch e.g., merge-ll.c, which is the first file you mention in this
> > > thread.
> > >
> > > Try searching the list archive for:
> > >
> > >   f:'Usman Akinyemi' dfn:merge-ll.c
> > >
> > > Is this different from the other patches you have sent to the list? My
> > > apologies if I am missing something here.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Taylor
> > Hi, Taylor
> >
> > Thanks for the reply. There is a little confusion going on.
> >
> > This is what happened. I had two patches which are entirely different
> > from this leftoverbit. Both has been reviewed by other maintainer and
> > integrated into seen by Junio through
> > https://github.com/git/git/commit/4dae47e02757333b7d6a6508e36ccb5463b6ad92
> >  and https://github.com/git/git/commit/dfdc6a71e76c7a1dab22fc9d9e437c858cfea6dc.
> > I submitted this leftoverbit patch but I made the mistake of basing it
> > on top of the previous branch which I use for the two above commits.
> > This is the commit which has the leftoverbit and the previous two
> > commits which have already been integrated into seen.
> > https://public-inbox.org/git/pull.1810.git.git.1728774574.gitgitgadget@gmail.com/T/#t
> > That is the reason why you saw it again. Also, I noticed you also
> > integrated the two patches again into seen and gave some comments. I
> > think that might not be needed again. Thank you.
> I meant for those particular two patches, since it is integrated into
> seen already,
> I can probably wait for it to be merged then work on the review which
> you gave or what do you think should be done ?
> Thank you.
Hi Taylor,

I went through your comment for the two previous patches, some of them
have already been addressed in the original thread
https://public-inbox.org/git/CAPSxiM8cpX9NYB02fAPA7WbLsLrvmFfsE2=VN=Ncguif7mQN9Q@mail.gmail.com/.
I am really sorry for confusing you.
Thank you.

Re: [RFC Outreachy] Leftoverbits, which involve replacing atoi with strtol or strtol_i or equivalent.

[Usman Akinyemi]

On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 4:04 AM Usman Akinyemi
<usmanakinyemi202@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 3:54 AM Usman Akinyemi
> <usmanakinyemi202@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 3:49 AM Usman Akinyemi
> > <usmanakinyemi202@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 12:42 AM Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Oct 13, 2024 at 03:46:05AM +0000, Usman Akinyemi wrote:
> > > > > On Sat, Oct 12, 2024 at 3:56 PM Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Usman,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, Oct 12, 2024 at 11:21:13AM +0000, Usman Akinyemi wrote:
> > > > > > > Hello,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I was looking at some #leftoverbits which I can work on and I came
> > > > > > > across this conversation.
> > > > > > > https://public-inbox.org/git/CAC4O8c-nuOTS=a0sVp1603KaM2bZjs+yNZzdAaa5CGTNGFE7hQ@mail.gmail.com/
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I followed the conversation and came accross
> > > > > > > three instances where I think atoi can be
> > > > > > > converted to strtol or strtol_i or parse_timestamp().
> > > > > > > These are the three files which I think the atoi can be
> > > > > > > replaced with.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This seems like a good #leftoverbits to use as an Outreachy
> > > > > > contribution. From a brief skim, it looks like this is going in the
> > > > > > right direction.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But to get help from the rest of the list, please submit this change as
> > > > > > a patch or patch series, following the instructions in:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >   - Documentation/MyFirstContribution.txt, and
> > > > > >   - Documentation/SubmittingPatches
> > > > > >
> > > > > Thanks Taylor, I already went through these as I already sent my first
> > > > > patch before.  Also, I already sent a patch as you suggested. Thank
> > > > > you very much.
> > > > > Usman Akinyemi.
> > > >
> > > > I must be missing something... I don't see any patches from you that
> > > > touch e.g., merge-ll.c, which is the first file you mention in this
> > > > thread.
> > > >
> > > > Try searching the list archive for:
> > > >
> > > >   f:'Usman Akinyemi' dfn:merge-ll.c
> > > >
> > > > Is this different from the other patches you have sent to the list? My
> > > > apologies if I am missing something here.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Taylor
> > > Hi, Taylor
> > >
> > > Thanks for the reply. There is a little confusion going on.
> > >
> > > This is what happened. I had two patches which are entirely different
> > > from this leftoverbit. Both has been reviewed by other maintainer and
> > > integrated into seen by Junio through
> > > https://github.com/git/git/commit/4dae47e02757333b7d6a6508e36ccb5463b6ad92
> > >  and https://github.com/git/git/commit/dfdc6a71e76c7a1dab22fc9d9e437c858cfea6dc.
> > > I submitted this leftoverbit patch but I made the mistake of basing it
> > > on top of the previous branch which I use for the two above commits.
> > > This is the commit which has the leftoverbit and the previous two
> > > commits which have already been integrated into seen.
> > > https://public-inbox.org/git/pull.1810.git.git.1728774574.gitgitgadget@gmail.com/T/#t
> > > That is the reason why you saw it again. Also, I noticed you also
> > > integrated the two patches again into seen and gave some comments. I
> > > think that might not be needed again. Thank you.
> > I meant for those particular two patches, since it is integrated into
> > seen already,
> > I can probably wait for it to be merged then work on the review which
> > you gave or what do you think should be done ?
> > Thank you.
> Hi Taylor,
>
> I went through your comment for the two previous patches, some of them
> have already been addressed in the original thread
> https://public-inbox.org/git/CAPSxiM8cpX9NYB02fAPA7WbLsLrvmFfsE2=VN=Ncguif7mQN9Q@mail.gmail.com/.
> I am really sorry for confusing you.
> Thank you.
Hi Taylor,

I am bringing your attention to this. Thank you.