1:54 p.m.
Em Fri, 13 Sep 2019 08:56:30 -0400
Matthew Wilcox <willy6545(a)gmail.com> escreveu:
It's easy enough to move the kernel-doc warnings out from under
W=1. I only
out them there to avoid overwhelming us with new warnings. If they're
mostly fixed now, let's make checking them the default.
Didn't try doing it kernelwide, but for media we do use W=1 by default,
on our CI instance.
There's a few warnings at EDAC, but they all seem easy enough to be
fixed.
So, from my side, I'm all to make W=1 default.
Regards,
Mauro
On Thu., Sep. 12, 2019, 16:01 Bart Van Assche, <bvanassche(a)acm.org> wrote:
> On 9/12/19 8:34 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Thu, 2019-09-12 at 14:31 +0100, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> >> On 9/11/19 5:40 PM, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
> >>> * The patch must compile without warnings (make C=1
> CF="-D__CHECK_ENDIAN__")
> >>> and does not incur any zeroday test robot complaints.
> >>
> >> How about adding W=1 to that make command?
> >
> > That's rather too compiler version dependent and new
> > warnings frequently get introduced by new compiler versions.
>
> I've never observed this myself. If a new compiler warning is added to
> gcc and if it produces warnings that are not useful for kernel code
> usually Linus or someone else is quick to suppress that warning.
>
> Another argument in favor of W=1 is that the formatting of kernel-doc
> headers is checked only if W=1 is passed to make.
>
> Bart.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ksummit-discuss mailing list
> Ksummit-discuss(a)lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ksummit-discuss
>
Thanks,
Mauro