On 09.11.2022 10:36, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 09.11.2022 10:21, Edwin Torok wrote: >> >> >>> On 9 Nov 2022, at 07:10, Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> wrote: >>> >>> On 09.11.2022 03:47, Henry Wang wrote: >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Edwin Török <edvin.to...@citrix.com> >>>>> Subject: [PATCH for-4.17 v3 09/15] tools/ocaml/xenstored/store.ml: fix >>>>> build >>>>> error >>>>> >>>>> Building with Dune in release mode fails with: >>>>> ``` >>>>> File "ocaml/xenstored/store.ml", line 464, characters 13-32: >>>>> Warning 18: this type-based record disambiguation is not principal. >>>>> File "ocaml/xenstored/store.ml", line 1: >>>>> Error: Some fatal warnings were triggered (1 occurrences) >>>>> ``` >>>>> >>>>> This is a warning to help keep the code futureproof, quoting from its >>>>> documentation: >>>>>> Check information path during type-checking, to make sure that all types >>>>> are >>>>>> derived in a principal way. When using labelled arguments and/or >>>>> polymorphic >>>>>> methods, this flag is required to ensure future versions of the compiler >>>>>> will >>>>>> be able to infer types correctly, even if internal algorithms change. All >>>>>> programs accepted in -principal mode are also accepted in the default >>>>> mode with >>>>>> equivalent types, but different binary signatures, and this may slow down >>>>> type >>>>>> checking; yet it is a good idea to use it once before publishing source >>>>>> code. >>>>> >>>>> Fixes: db471408edd46 "tools/ocaml/xenstored: Fix quota bypass on domain >>>>> shutdown" >>>> >>>> Nit: The format of this "Fixes:" tag might need to be fixed? >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Edwin Török <edvin.to...@citrix.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> Reason for inclusion in 4.17: >>>>> - fixes a build error in a previous commit that is already in master >>>> >>>> Yes, given this is a simple enough patch: >>>> >>>> Release-acked-by: Henry Wang <henry.w...@arm.com> >>> >>> Afaics this patch was previously posted in isolation, and it was >>> already release-acked. What's lacking there is a 2nd maintainer's >>> ack or a proper R-b. When it now is patch 9 in a series, it isn't >>> really obvious whether this could also be committed in isolation >>> (it looks like it does, but a clear statement to this effect >>> would have been beneficial). >>> >> >> >> You're right it already has both acks, it just hasn't been commited yet: > > Oh, that's only because I overlooked Christian's ack. Will commit this now.
But, sigh, I had to fix up the patch: Even the one submitted standalone used space indentation when the file in the tree uses hard tabs. And even if I had wanted to pull from your github tree I would have had to fix up at least the Fixes: tag. So I ended up hand-editing indentation ... Jan
