From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.20]) (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 985271D54FA for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2025 08:28:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.20 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1741595293; cv=none; b=g3uLlspCJeIR4Ss2aWXqwJyuJI7kJYVn9iLozyoWmgyOOh4hvLiyBK/YKRIKZJC5WMCSy9BLa6zify06MOH4wt3M+HbLr+HDeipbcthizgAcJCuoiqvPEm52jcq/qZsWwGtZ6NvxyZmnYFIk9pMtkvjMOYC7774jbKD3pkx1eSU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1741595293; c=relaxed/simple; bh=AO/IjuFIbXugfgtSEWyDOCjGNphrdVZXK8ISdYBpFqc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=rGXAxad5zgL4NvZNVkuXsmwQwsQ/TG7OXN0BA6Haz9pe0k0nTnRvrQrOwGeWPfNvw3ULWN1AtsWktD/3dPpfcNzWQ7ID5OzImRoOBbgxRsJ80iYc/qntxQY6k4zLVBjl5XUe/GNc9FgkPz7crpgPsQ2yDdrhtWC/3hcvLBLatXY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=BUMnr39+; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.20 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="BUMnr39+" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1741595292; x=1773131292; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=AO/IjuFIbXugfgtSEWyDOCjGNphrdVZXK8ISdYBpFqc=; b=BUMnr39+ltaXkDaIn4ZUk2Ne7p2V6M9StKcORDP7K6gjmjmb4nGGPZ63 32iJPGgR13IaXUmaV27rVLAjk2Z4848k64gmitwNSXPI7tCPibJzB6r0Y UCISXeuq9g6n97T2vXaLF7CmYLA6s9nnR0gfsb44YN/PLEdrIbKDGI40c laaTU4wNvCJmpjq3EFyQsthY/1BcoOvl67wBuA4ihN7Ja21UqJtev7MwJ cXb2c8Y7HNFvZdUNdUVs1YVMKHQfTq7s46hLYtg1UP/Ahhc+Czjtrsyx2 3NHyDmit1Z//7Xa1RaQpM6Rh6WkbWHEYVdSxovD6CRzeRsNa4mR0kLkZi g==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: LYuc9u0TRLe5wLzIpx9w/A== X-CSE-MsgGUID: wmmgbPGYSQ+VRWibphDFTA== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11368"; a="42291239" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.14,235,1736841600"; d="scan'208";a="42291239" Received: from fmviesa009.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.149]) by orvoesa112.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Mar 2025 01:28:11 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 4kuUd61yS2CINZ/e/5e7XQ== X-CSE-MsgGUID: YUSGAhigT4Kk2gnD69Zc1w== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.14,235,1736841600"; d="scan'208";a="120637705" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.58]) by fmviesa009.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Mar 2025 01:28:08 -0700 Received: from andy by smile.fi.intel.com with local (Exim 4.98) (envelope-from ) id 1trYUX-00000001BuD-1Pz5; Mon, 10 Mar 2025 10:28:05 +0200 Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2025 10:28:05 +0200 From: Andy Shevchenko To: David Laight Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Arnd Bergmann , Linus Torvalds , Christophe Leroy , Rasmus Villemoes , nnac123@linux.ibm.com, horms@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH next 1/8] test_hexdump: Change rowsize and groupsize to size_t Message-ID: References: <20250308093452.3742-1-david.laight.linux@gmail.com> <20250308093452.3742-2-david.laight.linux@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@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: <20250308093452.3742-2-david.laight.linux@gmail.com> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo On Sat, Mar 08, 2025 at 09:34:45AM +0000, David Laight wrote: > Both refer to positive values, size_t matches the other parameters. But why? The original code is written to mimic the parameters of the hexdump_to_buffer(). You probably want to say that this matches it after your other patch being applied (which is not yet the case). -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko