Signed-off-by: (was Re: [PATCH] exfat: fix boolreturn.cocci warnings

[Valdis KlÄtnieks]

On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 23:52:21 +0800, kbuild test robot said:
> From: kbuild test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> fs/exfat/file.c:50:10-11: WARNING: return of 0/1 in function 'exfat_allow_set_time' with return type bool

The warning and fix themselves look OK..

> Signed-off-by: kbuild test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx>

But somehow, this strikes me as fishy.

Or more correctly, it looks reasonable to me, but seems to clash with the
Developer's Certificate of Origin as described in submitting-patches.rst, which
makes the assumption that the patch submitter is a carbon-based life form. In
particular, I doubt the kbuild test robot can understand the thing, and I have
*no* idea who/what ends up owning the GPLv2 copyright on software automatically
created by other software.

Or are we OK on this?

Attachment: pgpsqUdyke7VC.pgp
Description: PGP signature