From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk (zeniv.linux.org.uk [62.89.141.173]) (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 5EA343358B7; Tue, 11 Nov 2025 10:01:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=62.89.141.173 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762855282; cv=none; b=XJjzI1RqBkkm8E5Rorb1T4crJIipo9mqlqAqwnt1RE/YLPc1wB/dVseLqZWwiob+B3GhiVGk/F0BSlI9m8XXVpQepccvGYJdgUm5u3zumKqHQQwvT17B0K4MDGsjdndvA/On57eF8ezkbV6/Yi19HXLzbVgd7TD+9VyKTgu3X/U= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762855282; c=relaxed/simple; bh=wKBkphm/u5H9VukG6SiMiDP7RhdDvCoVHHzcrQaeABo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=mjy+Pv2di7LTiTBOB+sPAM9Ah8D8B/MuKnXs0wRuiC1dBN8/bU2I9vQ6asuZv3rgagkaVyqWbg1xziHzBKV/38hwA0SO4lWG7XWvfEngTmyVLnM0sqK44DS2DSSGFo6rVp+145byOYfNlExVTXRrUPy/CHs0zXHHtksCqOsya6o= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=zeniv.linux.org.uk; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=ftp.linux.org.uk; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linux.org.uk header.i=@linux.org.uk header.b=MW8BXQRZ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=62.89.141.173 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=zeniv.linux.org.uk Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=ftp.linux.org.uk Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linux.org.uk header.i=@linux.org.uk header.b="MW8BXQRZ" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.org.uk; s=zeniv-20220401; h=Sender:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=mqzMG8DZM/gvRBtNitIiPBI41Lv4Ew10vO1gkoA+Kjs=; b=MW8BXQRZWfQCxSkVRaAW5RDNRv u1sda6MVQC9abOrzArDC8Tn/TJ0Lsnq3zSEIToxqDk+2Y3hn7b+eNYfnCIbwUlXCj2iIT2wjI/wew cBCjS6trY0nXW2EHN2fegFgCawQAJsMgikqLavler34mWIP1rQcTnw8A+1GdCExcvRmhNRc8KvMsv 1qNOJzokl6uVp9Ybw0BL5rIhQ4k24h8BTs3yqMPybTjBAdjdlfD5wcYREFELha7wTjdS7t/GfB0pT gJRegxPM88TCv3SWy/DpaceAnnpzuoH08amxqHgXkDEMvxRFnhOFsiApuvBrXKnLF1ZZDYsq8fPYB xbQFpQFQ==; Received: from viro by zeniv.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1vIlBb-0000000FeCe-2SRQ; Tue, 11 Nov 2025 10:01:15 +0000 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2025 10:01:15 +0000 From: Al Viro To: Christian Brauner Cc: bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, jack@suse.cz, raven@themaw.net, miklos@szeredi.hu, neil@brown.name, a.hindborg@kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, ocfs2-devel@lists.linux.dev, kees@kernel.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, paul@paul-moore.com, casey@schaufler-ca.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, john.johansen@canonical.com, selinux@vger.kernel.org, borntraeger@linux.ibm.com, bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, martin.lau@kernel.org, eddyz87@gmail.com, yonghong.song@linux.dev, clm@meta.com, ihor.solodrai@linux.dev Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 36/50] functionfs: switch to simple_remove_by_name() Message-ID: <20251111100115.GU2441659@ZenIV> References: <20251111065520.2847791-37-viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> <20754dba9be498daeda5fe856e7276c9c91c271999320ae32331adb25a47cd4f@mail.kernel.org> <20251111092244.GS2441659@ZenIV> <20251111-verelendung-unpolitisch-1bdcd153611e@brauner> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@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: <20251111-verelendung-unpolitisch-1bdcd153611e@brauner> Sender: Al Viro On Tue, Nov 11, 2025 at 10:30:22AM +0100, Christian Brauner wrote: > > Incorrect. The loop in question is > > Are you aware that you're replying to a bot-generated email? I am. I couldn't care less about the bot, but there are intelligent readers and the loop _is_ unidiomatic enough to trigger a WTF reaction in those as well. Sure, they can figure it out on their own, but... And yes, catching places that might smell fishy is one area where that kind of bots can be genuinely useful - triage assistance, same as with sparse/cc/etc. warnings. With the same need to LART the cretins of "The Most Holy Tool Makes Unhappy Noises - Must Appease It" variety, of course...