On 24/03/2025 at 22:41, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Sat, Mar 22, 2025 at 06:23:13PM +0900, Vincent Mailhol via B4 Relay wrote: >> From: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demar...@intel.com> >> >> Implement fixed-type BIT_U*() to help drivers add stricter checks, >> like it was done for GENMASK_U*(). > > ... > >> +/* >> + * Fixed-type variants of BIT(), with additional checks like >> GENMASK_TYPE(). The >> + * following examples generate compiler warnings due to >> shift-count-overflow: > > "...due to -Wshift-count-overflow:" ? > > Same idea — if you need a new version, since it's just a nit-pick.
If you want. I staged this change locally, so if there is a v8, it will be addressed. I applied the same to the previous patch which also mentioned shift-count-overflow without the -W prefix. But honestly, I am not convinced of the added value. This is from Lucas original patch one year ago, and no one was bothered by this. IMHO, when writing: (...) generate compiler warnings due to shift-count-overflow: I do not see where the ambiguity is. The sentence clearly say that this is a compiler warning, so with or without the -W prefix, the sentence is equally understandable. Yours sincerely, Vincent Mailhol
