From: Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>
To: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org
Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v2 00/10] make drivers/net/ethernet W=1 clean
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2020 10:11:24 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200915101124.00004146@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a28498acdf87f11e81d3282d63f18dbe1a3d5329.camel@kernel.org>
Saeed Mahameed wrote:
> Reviewed-by: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@nvidia.com>
Thanks! In all fairness, Jakub reviewed this in v1 too but I made enough
changes in v2 that I felt I had to drop the previous review ACKs.
> Hi Jesse,
> What was the criteria to select which drivers to enable in your .config
> ?
As Jakub said, I'm using allmodconfig on x86_64, but just yesterday
discovered there was much more to fix because I ran the kernel-doc
script directly on the source (those other things come from different
ARCH= builds which limit allmodconfig)
> I think we need some automation here and have a well known .config that
> enables as many drivers as we can for static + compilation testing,
> otherwise we are going to need to repeat this patch every 2-3 months.
Totally agree! Jakub already has some cobbled together and is regularly
running W=1 C=1 builds on all new patches. I found I could cross compile
different ARCH targets to get (some of) the other warnings, or better
yet just run the scripts/kernel-doc script directly in automation.
> I know Jakub and Dave do some compilation testing before merging but i
> don't know how much driver coverage they have and if they use a
> specific .config or they just manually create one on demand..
>
> bottom line, we need a bot after this series is applied.
> All we need is to daily apply all ongoing patches to some testing
> branch and let 0-DAY kernel test [1] run on it with whatever make
> command we define and with all drivers enabled.
Yes, that's the end goal and I think this moves us closer to that. A
little more work remains before we go and turn all warnings on - as
Andrew suggested in another reply. (it's also sometimes a losing game
fighting against many compiler versions, etc). However, the zero-day
bot reporting more results from W=1 compiles would *really* help (I
looked at , but am having some troubles verifying that)
> [1] https://lists.01.org/pipermail/kbuild-all
>
> > ---
> >
> > Q: Maybe I can fix the remaining warnings in a followup patch? If
> > I try to put it on this series it will make it much larger
> > (double).
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>
To: Saeed Mahameed <saeed@kernel.org>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 00/10] make drivers/net/ethernet W=1 clean
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2020 10:11:24 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200915101124.00004146@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a28498acdf87f11e81d3282d63f18dbe1a3d5329.camel@kernel.org>
Saeed Mahameed wrote:
> Reviewed-by: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@nvidia.com>
Thanks! In all fairness, Jakub reviewed this in v1 too but I made enough
changes in v2 that I felt I had to drop the previous review ACKs.
> Hi Jesse,
> What was the criteria to select which drivers to enable in your .config
> ?
As Jakub said, I'm using allmodconfig on x86_64, but just yesterday
discovered there was much more to fix because I ran the kernel-doc
script directly on the source (those other things come from different
ARCH= builds which limit allmodconfig)
> I think we need some automation here and have a well known .config that
> enables as many drivers as we can for static + compilation testing,
> otherwise we are going to need to repeat this patch every 2-3 months.
Totally agree! Jakub already has some cobbled together and is regularly
running W=1 C=1 builds on all new patches. I found I could cross compile
different ARCH targets to get (some of) the other warnings, or better
yet just run the scripts/kernel-doc script directly in automation.
> I know Jakub and Dave do some compilation testing before merging but i
> don't know how much driver coverage they have and if they use a
> specific .config or they just manually create one on demand..
>
> bottom line, we need a bot after this series is applied.
> All we need is to daily apply all ongoing patches to some testing
> branch and let 0-DAY kernel test [1] run on it with whatever make
> command we define and with all drivers enabled.
Yes, that's the end goal and I think this moves us closer to that. A
little more work remains before we go and turn all warnings on - as
Andrew suggested in another reply. (it's also sometimes a losing game
fighting against many compiler versions, etc). However, the zero-day
bot reporting more results from W=1 compiles would *really* help (I
looked at , but am having some troubles verifying that)
> [1] https://lists.01.org/pipermail/kbuild-all
>
> > ---
> >
> > Q: Maybe I can fix the remaining warnings in a followup patch? If
> > I try to put it on this series it will make it much larger
> > (double).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-15 17:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 50+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-15 1:44 [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v2 00/10] make drivers/net/ethernet W=1 clean Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-15 1:44 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-15 1:44 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v2 01/10] i40e: prepare flash string in a simpler way Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-15 1:44 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-15 1:44 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v2 02/10] intel-ethernet: clean up W=1 warnings in kdoc Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-15 1:44 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-15 1:44 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v2 03/10] intel: handle unused assignments Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-15 1:44 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-15 1:44 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v2 04/10] drivers/net/ethernet: clean up " Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-15 1:44 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-15 9:02 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Edward Cree
2020-09-15 9:02 ` Edward Cree
2020-09-15 1:44 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v2 05/10] drivers/net/ethernet: rid ethernet of no-prototype warnings Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-15 1:44 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-15 1:44 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v2 06/10] drivers/net/ethernet: handle one warning explicitly Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-15 1:44 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-15 3:25 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Saeed Mahameed
2020-09-15 3:25 ` Saeed Mahameed
2020-09-15 16:41 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-15 16:41 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-17 20:06 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Rustad, Mark D
2020-09-17 20:06 ` Rustad, Mark D
2020-09-15 1:44 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v2 07/10] drivers/net/ethernet: add some basic kdoc tags Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-15 1:44 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-15 1:44 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v2 08/10] drivers/net/ethernet: remove incorrectly formatted doc Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-15 1:44 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-15 1:44 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v2 09/10] sfc: fix kdoc warning Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-15 1:44 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-15 9:05 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Edward Cree
2020-09-15 9:05 ` Edward Cree
2020-09-15 1:44 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v2 10/10] drivers/net/ethernet: clean up mis-targeted comments Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-15 1:44 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-15 4:24 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v2 00/10] make drivers/net/ethernet W=1 clean Saeed Mahameed
2020-09-15 4:24 ` Saeed Mahameed
2020-09-15 14:03 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Andrew Lunn
2020-09-15 14:03 ` Andrew Lunn
2020-09-15 20:03 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Saeed Mahameed
2020-09-15 20:03 ` Saeed Mahameed
2020-09-15 20:43 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Andrew Lunn
2020-09-15 20:43 ` Andrew Lunn
2020-09-15 22:37 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " David Miller
2020-09-15 22:37 ` David Miller
2020-09-15 15:58 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jakub Kicinski
2020-09-15 15:58 ` Jakub Kicinski
2020-09-15 17:11 ` Jesse Brandeburg [this message]
2020-09-15 17:11 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-15 20:31 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " David Miller
2020-09-15 20:31 ` David Miller
2020-09-15 21:00 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jesse Brandeburg
2020-09-15 21:00 ` Jesse Brandeburg
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200915101124.00004146@intel.com \
--to=jesse.brandeburg@intel.com \
--cc=intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.