On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 23:52:21 +0800, kbuild test robot said: > From: kbuild test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx> > > fs/exfat/file.c:50:10-11: WARNING: return of 0/1 in function 'exfat_allow_set_time' with return type bool The warning and fix themselves look OK.. > Signed-off-by: kbuild test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx> But somehow, this strikes me as fishy. Or more correctly, it looks reasonable to me, but seems to clash with the Developer's Certificate of Origin as described in submitting-patches.rst, which makes the assumption that the patch submitter is a carbon-based life form. In particular, I doubt the kbuild test robot can understand the thing, and I have *no* idea who/what ends up owning the GPLv2 copyright on software automatically created by other software. Or are we OK on this?
Attachment:
pgpIVTKEK9n9c.pgp
Description: PGP signature
