On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 08:54:02PM +0200, Juan Quintela wrote:
> This is why I mean that I want the "diff" to be a bit more intelligent
> and "record" the things that we tell them that are correct.
I think I see what you meant. :)
> I will start with the default machine devices.
> Once the mechan
Peter Xu wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 06:36:00PM +0200, Juan Quintela wrote:
>> Peter Xu wrote:
>> > I'm doing some machine type checks to make sure nothing breaks for
>> > 7.2<->8.0. Along the way I found one false negative report on e1000e using
>> > the static checker, turns out to be an
On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 06:36:00PM +0200, Juan Quintela wrote:
> Peter Xu wrote:
> > I'm doing some machine type checks to make sure nothing breaks for
> > 7.2<->8.0. Along the way I found one false negative report on e1000e using
> > the static checker, turns out to be an issue in the checker it
Peter Xu wrote:
> I'm doing some machine type checks to make sure nothing breaks for
> 7.2<->8.0. Along the way I found one false negative report on e1000e using
> the static checker, turns out to be an issue in the checker itself.
>
> The problem is the checker doesn't take VMS_ARRAY into accoun
I'm doing some machine type checks to make sure nothing breaks for
7.2<->8.0. Along the way I found one false negative report on e1000e using
the static checker, turns out to be an issue in the checker itself.
The problem is the checker doesn't take VMS_ARRAY into account when
comparing with UNUS
