Re: [announce] new tree: "fix all build warnings, on all configs"

Linus Torvalds
2008-10-20T16:39:15Z

On Sat, 18 Oct 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> thx, you are right - fixed it via the patch below.

Hell no.

The old code was correct. Your code is shit. And you didn't fix
_anything_.

> case 5:
> *(int *)to = *(int *)from;
> - *((short *)to + 3) = *((short *)from + 3);
> + *((char *)(to + 3)) = *((char *)(from + 3));
> return to;

Are you just making changes by randomly inserting and deleting characters
until you don't see warnings? Or what?

That thing is supposed to be a 5-byte memcpy. Not a "take a random byte
from a random location and move it to another random location". That would
be "randcpy()", not "memcpy()".

I don't want to see obvious and shitty crap like this. I don't want to
pull from people who write code with some "random walk" algorithm.

F*ck me, what's wrong with you people? THAT CODE WAS NOT BUGGY. If it
causes a warning, it is because SOME CALLER used a 5-byte memcpy() on
something that gcc thought was just four bytes in size.

Ingo, I'm not going to pull _anything_ from you.

Linus