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? >> 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!