On Tue, Nov 18, 2025 at 9:30 AM Philipp Stanner phasta@mailbox.org wrote:
It's absolutely common to provide it. If you feel better without it, I can omit it, I guess.
No, it is not "absolutely common" to provide it in a case like this, and it is not about "feeling better" either.
As I already explained, it is confusing and takes more time to review. For instance, it made me double-check why you wanted to skip some versions or why the constraint was there. Please understand that maintainers will need to check what you wrote there and whether it is correct.
It is also riskier for yourself, since one can also easily get it wrong.
Those constraints, as the stable kernel rules explain, are about sending additional instructions. It also explicitly says such tagging is unnecessary when the Fixes tag is enough.
So, no, please do not add redundant constraints when they are not needed.
I ran rustfmt.
Yes, but this is a macro -- `rustfmt` is likely not formatting that code. In formatted code, there are no multiline `unsafe` blocks that contain code after the opening brace, so it looks off.
Cheers, Miguel