On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 08:31:41AM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 5:22 AM Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Sun, Oct 22, 2023 at 01:57:39PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > > > Add handling of a bunch of possible cases which allows deducing extra > > > information about subregister bounds, both u32 and s32, from full register > > > u64/s64 bounds. > > > > > > Also add smin32/smax32 bounds derivation from corresponding umin32/umax32 > > > bounds, similar to what we did with smin/smax from umin/umax derivation in > > > previous patch. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Forgot to add > > > > Acked-by: Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@xxxxxxxx> > > > > And that the acked-by for this and previous patches applies to future > > version of the patchset as well. > > > > Q: I going through the patches rather slowly, one by one, and sending > > acked-by as I go, is that considered too verbose? Is it be better to spend > > the time to go through the entire patchset first and just send an acked-by > > to the cover letter? > > Take your time. Careful review of every individual patch is certainly preferred. > This is a tricky change. I'm still stuck on patch 2 :) Noted and thanks :)
