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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8026C2D0E4 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 23:47:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AAF942463B for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 23:47:52 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="kIsqOYTZ" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org AAF942463B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CbN0j6l4wzDqZ9 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 10:47:49 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=kernel.org (client-ip=198.145.29.99; helo=mail.kernel.org; envelope-from=gustavoars@kernel.org; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=kIsqOYTZ; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CbMy53gv3zDqYL for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 10:45:33 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from embeddedor (187-162-31-110.static.axtel.net [187.162.31.110]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0381B2463D; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 23:45:27 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1605656729; bh=ttg4Gcus/EKo32RUGFMpSMZAYd5VlrCZiWV26ttxjPE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=kIsqOYTZt8X/hArgRe8n2hSYbJ8b4fM3OTO5MT9Y9T3ym3Zw56mbQHRkOrT9eCrAi JcOYEUt1w7Pvv6WqqyILq/hpyKsknAkLKDFaPId2cvIRSBWPVX3+IblA3CRMLMUh/d wVopz3hi+wxauGf46yqHU7CArqWzi6UUX21FhMsQ= Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 17:45:26 -0600 From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" To: Nick Desaulniers Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] Revert "lib: Revert use of fallthrough pseudo-keyword in lib/" Message-ID: <20201117234526.GA7807@embeddedor> References: <20201116043532.4032932-1-ndesaulniers@google.com> <20201116043532.4032932-3-ndesaulniers@google.com> <20201117030214.GB1340689@ubuntu-m3-large-x86> <20201117221629.GA4679@embeddedor> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Miguel Ojeda , LKML , clang-built-linux , Paul Mackerras , Nathan Chancellor , linuxppc-dev Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 02:28:43PM -0800, Nick Desaulniers wrote: > On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 2:16 PM Gustavo A. R. Silva > wrote: > > > > I'm happy to take this series in my tree. I'm planing to send a > > pull-request for -rc5 with more related changes. So, I can include > > this in the same PR. > > > > In the meantime I'll add this to my testing tree, so it can be > > build-tested by the 0-day folks. :) > > SGTM, and thank you. I'm sure you saw the existing warning about > indentation. Do we want to modify the revert patch, or put another > patch on top? In this case, it'd be much better to modify the revert patch. I also saw someone made a comment to the first patch of the series. If you can address both issues and send v2 it'd be great. Anyways, as those are trivial changes, I already added the series to my testing tree for 0-day build-testing. Thanks -- Gustavo