lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Feb]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 00/21] [Set 2] Rid W=1 warnings from Clock
On Thu, 11 Feb 2021, Stephen Boyd wrote:

> Quoting Lee Jones (2021-02-11 13:10:54)
> > On Thu, 11 Feb 2021, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> >
> > > Quoting Lee Jones (2021-01-26 04:45:19)
> > > > This set is part of a larger effort attempting to clean-up W=1
> > > > kernel builds, which are currently overwhelmingly riddled with
> > > > niggly little warnings.
> > > >
> > > > This is the last set. Clock is clean after this.
> > >
> > > Is it possible to slam in some patch that makes W=1 the default for the
> > > clk directory? I'm trying to avoid seeing this patch series again.
> >
> > One of my main goals of this project is that everyone (contributors,
> > maintainers auto-builder robots etc) will be enabling W=1 builds
> > *locally*.
> >
> > This isn't something you'll want to do at a global (i.e. in Mainline)
> > level. That's kinda the point of W=1.
> >
>
> Agreed, but is it possible to pass W=1 in the drivers/clk/Makefile?

That would circumvent the point of W=1. Level-1 warnings are deemed,
and I'm paraphrasing/making this up "not worth rejecting pull-requests
over". In contrast, if Linus catches any W=0 warnings at pull-time,
he will reject the pull-request as 'untested'.

W=1 is defiantly something you'll want to enable locally though, and
subsequently push back on contributors submitting code adding new
ones.

--
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Senior Technical Lead - Developer Services
Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-02-12 10:23    [W:0.138 / U:0.204 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site