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 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C445BC25B74 for ; Thu, 30 May 2024 11:48:14 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:In-Reply-To:From:References:CC:To:Subject:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=yYL8uItYjLvX4XXmJVewmmoWRUKbv1uKkHOYIVSiw1Y=; b=EFWaG+U38heeS5/UhGv4YtlNAV SDmQXcdvfN9WF/dgKR7vfYqawU7XmrjmtlBQrmygcdleJalTtM6bl3gNaBdaaeiyorseVoCvDyhz7 yZujlFNfdEs3262fjgraRqFtxzXqCYRFJBZh6Y9YhV4OrajEMoykj3Wrd7z5NSlvPfnZucpIs4j3O wbe4iIu3LWKa6Adveny8dweMHFFZfA0fqqeqrpnFB6M/hFliI7jCmBR20p+Trjt3izUrYGHCPUIJr hDgwaz8Nn+ojwx7f8WZLWi6b7GMPGodSd+wEMnfQcV6c0yqPucfCkFlb0aFD5RpdVhFWDG9j4jgK5 IIkgO6Zw==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1sCeGR-0000000796z-3ZWA; Thu, 30 May 2024 11:48:11 +0000 Received: from szxga02-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.188]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1sCeGN-0000000794Y-1QwK for linux-um@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 30 May 2024 11:48:10 +0000 Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.163.174]) by szxga02-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4VqksY3crKzmWyJ; Thu, 30 May 2024 19:43:29 +0800 (CST) Received: from dggpeml500022.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.185.36.66]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AAEA0140382; Thu, 30 May 2024 19:47:53 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.67.111.104] (10.67.111.104) by dggpeml500022.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.66) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.1.2507.35; Thu, 30 May 2024 19:47:53 +0800 Message-ID: <49f5cd14-987f-4d72-8606-496fca08a708@huawei.com> Date: Thu, 30 May 2024 19:47:52 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] hostfs: convert hostfs to use the new mount api To: Dan Carpenter CC: , , , , , , , References: <74576c52-5eca-4961-ada4-a9ec99fb16cf@huawei.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Hongbo Li In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.67.111.104] X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems701-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.178) To dggpeml500022.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.66) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20240530_044807_624131_D22D1BA2 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 13.02 ) X-BeenThere: linux-um@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-um" Errors-To: linux-um-bounces+linux-um=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Thanks for replying. I will send the new patch marked with v2 later. regards, Hongbo Li On 2024/5/23 18:43, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 07:21:09PM +0800, Hongbo Li wrote: >> Thanks for your attention, I have solved the warnings in the following patch >> (the similar title: hostfs: convert hostfs to use the new mount API): >> >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240515025536.3667017-1-lihongbo22@huawei.com/ >> >> or >> >> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linux-um/patch/20240515025536.3667017-1-lihongbo22@huawei.com/ >> >> It was strange that the kernel test robot did not send the results on the >> new patch. > > With uninitialized variable warnings, quite often Smatch is not the only > or first checker to report the bug so I normally search lore to see if > it has already been fixed. In this case there were no bug reports from > Nathan Chancelor and the second version of the patch wasn't marked as a > v2 and there was no note explaining it like: > > --- > v2: fixed uninitialized variable warning > > So it wasn't immediately clear that it had been fixed already. > https://staticthinking.wordpress.com/2022/07/27/how-to-send-a-v2-patch/ > > regards, > dan carpenter >