Re: [PATCH] sched: Remove nested extern

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>]

* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 09:41:44AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > 
> > * Rustad, Mark D <mark.d.rustad@intel.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Sep 22, 2014, at 2:21 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 08:59:32PM +0000, Rustad, Mark D wrote:
> > > >> Because I have found that enabling many warnings helps identify problems
> > > >> in code and it has been my standard practice since about 1999 to do so.
> > > >> The compiler warnings are really just another form of static analysis,
> > > >> and I use it routinely on every compile. Here is how routinely: I have
> > > >> W=1 in my environment, W=12 is just too painful. I would change that
> > > >> default to W=12 if it wasn't insane to do so.
> > > > 
> > > > Many warnings are just plain insane and stupid. They're not 
> > > > helping anybody. There's a very good reason many are 
> > > > disabled. I'm sure you can find some entertaining discussions 
> > > > on the topic if you search the LKML archives.
> > > 
> > > That is what I used to think. -Wshadow for example. What's the 
> > > problem? [...]
> > 
> > Then please add it to the default build. There are some warnings 
> > that used to be crap but have been improved over the year - 
> > enable them one by one, with good case by case justification and 
> > analysis. Just going after all W=2 warnings is insane.

So by 'try to add it' I mean -Wshadow, which is a useful warning 
that I use in user-space projects as well: it does catch 
bogosities and isn't annoyingly inaccurate.

> So I don't like the nested extern one because it either means 
> not using that language feature at all or pooping all over your 
> code with that DECL crap. That just a loose-loose proposition.

Agreed.

Thanks,

	Ingo