On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 11:15:17AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: > To be clear, I dislike the function annotation because then it applies to > *everything* within the function, which is overly broad and the intent becomes > unclear. That makes it painful to refactor the code (since e.g. if we want to > add another operation to the function which *should not* wrap, that gets > silenced too). Yeah, I find that a convincing argument for larger functions, but it seemed to me that for these 1-line implementations it was okay. But regardless, yup, no function-level annotation here. > I'm happy with something that applies to specific types/variables or specific > operations (which is what these patches do). Thanks! -- Kees Cook
