From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from s3.sipsolutions.net ([5.9.151.49]:54089 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750948AbcEBGde (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 May 2016 02:33:34 -0400 Message-ID: <1462170808.5898.2.camel@sipsolutions.net> (sfid-20160502_083337_981735_8ADA7259) Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] iw: Android.mk & version.sh: update for Android based compilation From: Johannes Berg To: Julian Calaby , Yongqin Liu Cc: linux-wireless , Filipe Brandenburger Date: Mon, 02 May 2016 08:33:28 +0200 In-Reply-To: (sfid-20160429_012659_977445_10CE3B7C) References: <1461850619-15298-1-git-send-email-yongqin.liu@linaro.org> (sfid-20160429_012659_977445_10CE3B7C) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, 2016-04-29 at 09:26 +1000, Julian Calaby wrote: > > + > > +# Silence some warnings for now. Needs to be fixed upstream. > > b/26105799 > Comments like this worry me: who is being referred to as "upstream", > what are these warnings and why has nobody fixed them? > It's funny, because we're upstream (the kernel.org iw repository I maintain) and they're submitting a Makefile to the same upstream - saying that "upstream" should fix warnings. In reality, it's a deluded comment - the warnings from -Wunused- parameter are entirely useless and cannot be fixed without cluttering the code with __maybe_unused (or so) since the functions implement APIs. This alone is a reason to reject this patch. If there are legitimate warnings, submit patches first to fix them (and perhaps add the relevant warning to the real Makefile). If I then reject those "fixes", don't put such a baselessly accusatory comment into the Makefile. johannes