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 Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF725C433EF for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 22:26:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 1717E6B0071; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 17:26:13 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 121D66B0073; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 17:26:13 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id F2AD96B0074; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 17:26:12 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0150.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.150]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4C9F6B0071 for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 17:26:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin16.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8ED9181CAC54 for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 22:26:12 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79015811784.16.28C0549 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [139.178.84.217]) by imf04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BB6940009 for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 22:26:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3E4C261342 for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 22:26:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A7013C36AF5 for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 22:26:10 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1641853570; bh=Yy9vhvdSWUoAdkNq1RqvMXdUU+tXDUzwGivddfPXKGQ=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:From; b=NJLR9PsHwHEgk4+Xq8bQwH9aPOzzeM2KrGoOtYNw5lSLc+tRRp92rHeVtGFrGsU8c Kb49Ksjk75fyzX0GcvkXUz7NXriSpFLQi5Xt8wWHbaDl3u/4Fe4YPKYXYCqPb8GLED VtDiibVGZ7mXQGYDTo+pT8+PduvceJqGqnbDW40DjQaJX+UhjZ7YXcki+O6NNxl/aI a8yQ3nEOZH7PBh+DZsmL0kp2kFVo4eQtJ51Qu46CFFAsraTYBDkw03dJ3G/Q1rrRKp 67Pbnnr7DAewhqHmbQhUIQkbArMxgt5wMWJDw3PD7MLwiNL5ceypkCnAPC93aWDdkH z6UNlWRqMWGrA== Received: by mail-yb1-f169.google.com with SMTP id m6so31790302ybc.9 for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 14:26:10 -0800 (PST) X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532tM9fMN8X4kqPviYxb86jr3Ai1D2qohTCzDNeNTAhytYsvO6aK o9MUmLMCVMqsF1GPSJ4eKQdvHjrTCGs5J3G16GM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwHZrP4areBByLUi5wU6zQFagixPhet5WFjwLaQ1Qick+FRij+TPfEhXB/JZaYX+J7LpWKrIelnWC/6LCOhnBo= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6902:1106:: with SMTP id o6mr2713172ybu.195.1641853569738; Mon, 10 Jan 2022 14:26:09 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <202201060848.nagWejwv-lkp@intel.com> <20220108005854.658596-1-christylee@fb.com> In-Reply-To: From: Song Liu Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2022 14:25:58 -0800 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] Fix incorrect integer literal used for marking scratched registers in verifier logs To: Christy Lee Cc: Christy Lee , Dan Carpenter , Alexei Starovoitov , kbuild-all@lists.01.org, kbuild@lists.01.org, Linux-MM , bpf , Kernel Team , kernel test robot Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Rspamd-Server: rspam01 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4BB6940009 X-Stat-Signature: m6m45c3tt1194aoz7ytqseietky7xyrk Authentication-Results: imf04.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=NJLR9PsH; spf=pass (imf04.hostedemail.com: domain of song@kernel.org designates 139.178.84.217 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=song@kernel.org; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=kernel.org X-HE-Tag: 1641853572-735372 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000006, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 2:13 PM Christy Lee wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 1:52 PM Song Liu wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jan 7, 2022 at 4:59 PM Christy Lee wrote: > > > > > > env->scratched_stack_slots is a 64-bit value, we should use ULL > > > instead of UL literal values. > > > > > > Reported-by: kernel test robot > > > Reported-by: Dan Carpenter > > > Signed-off-by: Christy Lee > > > > The fix looks good to me. Thus: > > > > Acked-by: Song Liu > > > > However, the patch looks corrupted. Also, the subject is probably too > > long (./scripts/checkpatch.pl should complain about it). > > > > I just checked that even with an absurdly long subject (more than 200 > characters), ./scripts/checkpatch.pl doesn't complain. It only complains > when the commit message body has longer than 75 characters but not the > subject line. What's the maximum subject line length? Hmm.. you are right. I somehow thought there was a limit by checkpatch. I would personally limit it to 75 characters though.