From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 11F7AC90 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2019 15:00:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A41B831 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2019 15:00:23 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2019 11:39:02 -0300 From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab To: Daniel Vetter Message-ID: <20190619113902.76bd169a@coco.lan> In-Reply-To: References: <20190614135807.GA6573@kroah.com> <20190614121137.02b8a6dc@coco.lan> <1560525785.27102.16.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20190614124305.65eb8dbd@coco.lan> <1560527386.27102.23.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20190614130456.6c339c01@coco.lan> <1560528994.27102.34.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20190614144836.0a71ebe5@coco.lan> <20190617103115.670bf968@coco.lan> <20190619075351.GP28859@kadam> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: James Bottomley , media-submaintainers@linuxtv.org, kbuild@01.org, ksummit , Dan Carpenter Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Pull network and Patch Acceptance Consistency List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Em Wed, 19 Jun 2019 10:33:23 +0200 Daniel Vetter escreveu: > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 9:56 AM Dan Carpenter wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 10:31:15AM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > > > Also, usually, the bots don't build with W=1, as, on most subsystems, > > > this cause lots of warnings[1]. > > > > > > [1] On media, we have zero warnings with W=1. > > > > > > > We could ask the kbuild devs if they would consider making W=1 a per > > tree option. > > No need to ask, just add a Kconfig which sets additional cflags for > you for your tree and your good. The usual combinatorial testing will > discover the new warnings. That's at least what we do for i915.ko > (including -Werror). Gets the job done. While this works, having a W=1 per tree would, IMHO, work better, as, as new warnings get added to W=1, we'll get those for free. - I don't like the idea of having -Werror being automatically added, as this may cause problems when people try to compile with a different compiler version - or on some weird architectures. Specially on drivers that build with COMPILE_TEST[1], depending on the architecture they're built, false-positive warnings rise, specially on unusual architecture with has different defines for some arch-specific typedefs (signed/unsigned, different integer type, usage or not of volatile, a different address space, etc). [1] On media, our goal is that everything should build with COMPILE_TEST. Thanks, Mauro