> On 29-Sep-2023, at 11:43 AM, Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Ani Sinha <anisi...@redhat.com> writes:
>
>>> On 29-Sep-2023, at 11:17 AM, Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Ani Sinha <anisi...@redhat.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Code changes in acpi that addresses all compiler complaints coming from
>>>> enabling
>>>> -Wshadow flags. Enabling -Wshadow catches cases of local variables
>>>> shadowing
>>>> other local variables or parameters. These makes the code confusing and/or
>>>> adds
>>>> bugs that are difficult to catch.
>>>>
>>>> The code is tested to build with and without the flag turned on.
>>>>
>>>> CC: Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com>
>>>> CC: Philippe Mathieu-Daude <phi...@linaro.org>
>>>> CC: m...@redhat.com
>>>> CC: imamm...@redhat.com
>>>> Message-Id: <87r0mqlf9x....@pond.sub.org>
>>>
>>> This is my "Help wanted for enabling -Wshadow=local" post.
>>
>> Yes indeed. I wanted to refer to that thread for context in the commit log.
>
> I appreciate your diligence. We just don't have an established tag
> convention for "see also" references to e-mail. I could append
>
> See also
>
> Subject: Help wanted for enabling -Wshadow=local
> Message-Id: <87r0mqlf9x....@pond.sub.org>
> https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/87r0mqlf9x....@pond.sub.org
>
> to your first paragraph. Want me to?
Sure, if that is ok.
>
>>> A commit's Message-Id tag is supposed to point to the patch submission
>>> e-mail, and git-am will add that:
>>>
>>> Message-ID: <20230922124203.127110-1-anisi...@redhat.com>
>>>
>>> We'll have two Message-IDs then. Confusing.
>>>
>>> Could perhaps use
>>>
>>> See-also: Message-Id: <87r0mqlf9x....@pond.sub.org>
>>>
>>> but I doubt it's worth the bother.
>>
>> OK
>>
>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Ani Sinha <anisi...@redhat.com>
>>>
>>> Queued less the extra Message-Id, thanks!
