From owner-svn-src-head@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Dec 1 12:28:25 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 780BB358; Sun, 1 Dec 2013 12:28:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from theravensnest.org (theraven.freebsd.your.org [216.14.102.27]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4498311DB; Sun, 1 Dec 2013 12:28:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.0.89] (cpc27-cmbg15-2-0-cust235.5-4.cable.virginm.net [86.27.188.236]) (authenticated bits=0) by theravensnest.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id rB1CSJlP020665 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sun, 1 Dec 2013 12:28:21 GMT (envelope-from theraven@FreeBSD.org) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1822\)) Subject: Re: svn commit: r258779 - in head/sys/dev: cesa drm drm2/i915 drm2/radeon hatm From: David Chisnall In-Reply-To: <20131201075944.GF59496@kib.kiev.ua> Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2013 12:28:14 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <201311302216.rAUMGcPA037268@svn.freebsd.org> <20131201075944.GF59496@kib.kiev.ua> To: Konstantin Belousov X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1822) Cc: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, Eitan Adler X-BeenThere: svn-src-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.16 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the src tree for head/-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2013 12:28:25 -0000 On 1 Dec 2013, at 07:59, Konstantin Belousov = wrote: > Revert the drm2/i915 changes from this and following commits now. > You did not contacted obvious maintainer of the file. >=20 > The changes are pointless and make the import of upstream changes > harder; for i915_reg.h, much harder. >=20 > Not to mention that the whole churn is not needed if the > -fno-strict-overflow flag is used. If supporting code that is obviously wrong (as in this case, as the = compiler will happily tell you if you don't explicitly silence warnings) = is the justification for wanting -fno-strict-overflow, then this is a = very flimsy justification. David