From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.11]) (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 D7CDC7E0E8; Fri, 9 Jan 2026 17:09:52 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.11 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1767978594; cv=none; b=N/AtWFRFuJUd9XIlDIiso7N8or4DtQS2MWRbwWd1pWlABcqHBYztEQL4u9TgKByXenaAf/ioRkH0gTbHJmUg+q+Btrvv5X5Tttkl5TEISgRr39Y8IzI2pTGl8WQvHFigIQYLkhcb5iwYNqAq6iRV7QvDZ1J/S9r8fSP8w16EA/o= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1767978594; c=relaxed/simple; bh=MvwACpTFJu57vsNGjYn4XJh1yUD/ap8AVrYYA/Vbv1E=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=PiCTmsjEWSXB0ETelvcIBJvUvlYnlAhxKLb3BsPVaNtQIhxFWBE0JeJQhh655TDXPwxH5BMSUMlyy1BhRq8xbEcpbwBWu6XTr/kr44LzQ1TEP4cmCX7hYnf5u16x5hBjPytSu8hp+TPMywnvvpyP10cTLkL06y69YD28dLytToo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=Fqh/uNXm; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.11 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="Fqh/uNXm" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1767978593; x=1799514593; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=MvwACpTFJu57vsNGjYn4XJh1yUD/ap8AVrYYA/Vbv1E=; b=Fqh/uNXmkt9OrP00NskbiEXSBuEQXQmR7kGyyn8ivUlPlvoMNsmlPIhu ka4RX1/Flfs/P0NG5IZn8VHuB9pSRjIBFdrKXaIPuR8ijmhkVAfpbw0GQ bXv3RtLZahv2FUQYUrO/WqdfgMgmDylC+VeogMrLmfq3mJkYGWW+Bn22z JEaBzrt/AMCxVsKrVM+AcGCju/nLb+s8bm+JoVz/3C5sHs+luGAEAG83m KzMr/YXo/mUq1k1PsAaQDYKq5TmFKd2Zk1Wns0dgrU0gAwCwB00B72coQ k0l9LY0RINGWuFlJ4bNA4bIUurSk0yhfttBd+nDJIWMlURlAYKHWsaaPw g==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: Saaa0k9xQwSNiwOzL6DNEA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: qOfhSowWRiyhCGaPxu+R5A== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11666"; a="79998928" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.21,214,1763452800"; d="scan'208";a="79998928" Received: from fmviesa007.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.147]) by fmvoesa105.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Jan 2026 09:09:52 -0800 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: l0uHdrCfT3y7OOcZOb4l6Q== X-CSE-MsgGUID: z5356kS5Sjm7TTPAmyRFlw== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.21,214,1763452800"; d="scan'208";a="203140989" Received: from abityuts-desk.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.245.244.157]) by fmviesa007-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Jan 2026 09:09:50 -0800 Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2026 19:09:48 +0200 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Dmitry Antipov Cc: Carlos Maiolino , Christoph Hellwig , Kees Cook , Andy Shevchenko , Andrew Morton , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] lib: introduce simple error-checking wrapper for memparse() Message-ID: References: <20260108165216.1054625-1-dmantipov@yandex.ru> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-xfs@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: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - c/o Alberga Business Park, 6 krs, Bertel Jungin Aukio 5, 02600 Espoo On Fri, Jan 09, 2026 at 02:41:55PM +0300, Dmitry Antipov wrote: > On Thu, 2026-01-08 at 22:05 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > 1) inherited one with strange indentation; > > Hm...where? AFAICS everything is properly indented with TABs. Should be with one space, and not one tab. > > 2) missing Return section (run kernel-doc validator with -Wreturn, > > for example). > > Good point. Should checkpatch.pl call kernel-doc (always or perhaps > if requested using command-line option)? > > OTOH 1) lib/cmdline.c violates kernel-doc -Wreturn almost everywhere > :-( and 2) IIUC this patch is already queued by Andrew. I would > prefer to fix kernel-doc glitches immediately after memvalue() and > its first real use case (presumably XFS) both reaches an upstream. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko