On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 10:04 AM Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > Ah, granted, I was surprised, too. > > Thanks for this view. I mean, it's a good thing that we don't have any issues that this patch would catch today. Seems Steven and I were surprised (pessimistic?). > > > > Maybe would be helpful to mention that in the commit message. > > My Linux software build resources might be too limited to take > more system configuration variations safely into account > for this issue. That's understandable. I think if the patch bakes in linux-next, it might flush out some problematic cases in other ARCH's. > Would you like to achieve further checks here? I reviewed the functions here and believe the ones you added checks for all look good. I value Rasmus' feedback, so I'd like to hear what he thinks about my earlier comments. I have no comment if we should go further/annotate more, other than that that can be done in a follow up patch. Though Joe's comment on the relative order of where the annotation appears in the function declarations should be addressed in a V2 IMO. -- Thanks, ~Nick Desaulniers
