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=-5.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, 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 6A969C433ED for ; Thu, 20 May 2021 11:56:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (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 D658460FEF for ; Thu, 20 May 2021 11:56:53 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org D658460FEF Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=roeck-us.net Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4Fm7WS1K9tz3bss for ; Thu, 20 May 2021 21:56:52 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20161025 header.b=tMou58N9; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com (client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::836; helo=mail-qt1-x836.google.com; envelope-from=groeck7@gmail.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20161025 header.b=tMou58N9; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mail-qt1-x836.google.com (mail-qt1-x836.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::836]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Fm7Vy3gP2z2xvc for ; Thu, 20 May 2021 21:56:24 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-qt1-x836.google.com with SMTP id m13so12473720qtk.13 for ; Thu, 20 May 2021 04:56:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:to:cc:references:from:subject:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=4NwcGNbUiLWOZxk3Po/t8ltzFfv9Dmek7i9uGh5YXhs=; b=tMou58N9AsYp7b3didtdforKkhve5y6UEbSKe9s9y/TlxOj/Rgb07i/jT6K+OSXcXD NogA0utjZXXCu46qXSFt7fbeyIDmqp7VC0DpIouJzA/gcBb4b8oLwxxhEeE8G1Qd7Ca+ Rgqvz3BeWv38aRsnVs0fTfbH52ZHb9+8qNUmri0jMSznuhnMS5gY2HXMPkcOUqjw8dLT Wwr6H3uofyYxmpMlFqw+BhtLFQoYtr+bzZALH1TcmsO2dKaXKNFvgSUKqMuGz+CV0qHw kFqrsU0fPgFpqRcVb4r4WFuv9Y44eQTX0luZoqGvF5svEYJaqEMWjSjJQ8ofU7tsi57c DmaQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:to:cc:references:from:subject:message-id :date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=4NwcGNbUiLWOZxk3Po/t8ltzFfv9Dmek7i9uGh5YXhs=; b=t4JAhO/1IfC9hvITRmyaY3RHNZtwYUA1v5Oz9ftqksuHkbgWZ9i/a5Nfrv9PgrJcAh iXgOPbLv5R7RmO5L7U9LvkUqeKkw6o7b0NUoV/cHx6R+Ne8ZcV4HgOqe9GFLLkipCtKH n2U5UV1IFUf9xyPwQPvlXMQL4zPaO/N2LJGk8Pg8egmeOjJXeXjxWu5mvfWnuiAQBNBi 1If4gu4vr63Pz8dEEz7vhPZBvOlxfMKrqFm95AUU9kOnf2OdaVgSSiBaVEK/VQhy5t+h rCAiswN8QUxNdY5LQilUu7F5Q9VrG87kSJdqvVXk63jEMXi2WHXfioQHFhWfzRpQq1MU LyPQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530PzeHevBfWvLHcJftgLLsKILidWilBsdnIhqPq8aZHmd5BM9ly z7/YEdvjJ6ov492hW7mTntY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwbtFMmRH/lQLxI0xaeHJA4iAHYjZ+u77Kze81ydq8mtfRcYReCgbscjlFfUq1VbMIJ2FPePA== X-Received: by 2002:aed:2128:: with SMTP id 37mr4519811qtc.163.1621511780559; Thu, 20 May 2021 04:56:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from server.roeck-us.net ([2600:1700:e321:62f0:329c:23ff:fee3:9d7c]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j6sm1715403qti.4.2021.05.20.04.56.18 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 20 May 2021 04:56:20 -0700 (PDT) To: Michael Ellerman , "Aneesh Kumar K.V" References: <20210422054323.150993-1-aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com> <20210422054323.150993-6-aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com> <20210515163525.GA1106462@roeck-us.net> <87pmxpqxb1.fsf@linux.ibm.com> <87a6ork1qp.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> <969f377f-fddb-c2de-781c-fde37d121a4d@roeck-us.net> <87wnrtiqjp.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> From: Guenter Roeck Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 5/9] powerpc/mm/book3s64: Update tlb flush routines to take a page walk cache flush argument Message-ID: <52aa88b9-1f88-dc5f-c3f5-b7ead24e38df@roeck-us.net> Date: Thu, 20 May 2021 04:56:17 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87wnrtiqjp.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 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: npiggin@gmail.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, kaleshsingh@google.com, joel@joelfernandes.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On 5/20/21 4:38 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote: > Guenter Roeck writes: >> On 5/18/21 5:26 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote: >> [ ... ] >>>>> That was the generic header change in the patch. I was commenting about the >>>>> ppc64 specific change causing build failures. >>>> >>>> Ah, sorry. I wasn't aware that the following is valid C code >>>> >>>> void f1() >>>> { >>>> return f2(); >>>> ^^^^^^ >>>> } >>>> >>>> as long as f2() is void as well. Confusing, but we live and learn. >>> >>> It might be valid, but it's still bad IMHO. >>> >>> It's confusing to readers, and serves no useful purpose. >>> >> >> Agreed, but it is surprisingly wide-spread. Try to run the coccinelle >> script below, just for fun. The script doesn't even catch instances >> in include files, yet there are more than 450 hits. > > Yikes, that is a lot. > > I guess they're pretty harmless, but would be nice to clean them up > eventually. > > Why doesn't the script work for instances in headers? > Ah, that is one of those Coccinelle details. No idea. I run the script with make coccicheck COCCI="return-void.cocci" MODE=report M=. Probably there is a better way to invoke it which does handle include files. Guenter