From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dan Carpenter Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 07:12:22 +0000 Subject: Re: automated warning notifications Message-Id: <20120615071222.GZ13539@mwanda> List-Id: References: <20120614172523.GB4400@mwanda> <20120615014835.GA5695@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20120615014835.GA5695@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Fengguang Wu Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 09:48:35AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: > The lots of false warnings are a big problem. It makes the automated > notification more noises than signals to people. So I end up disabling > the sparse check totally.. > I do a basic sanity check of my emails before I send them. Sometimes I do send false positives. If the warning is introduced by a very new code then probably the patch author can answer my question off the top of her head. Also I send some false positives just to try learn what the rules are. > In an average working day, 1-2 build errors will be caught and email > notified. I guess there will be more sparse warnings if it's turned > on. > > Perhaps the sparse warnings can be enabled, but only sent to the patch > author. If you and anyone else are interested, they could be sent to > some mailing list, too. One thing I'm sure is, we probably never want > to disturb the busy maintainers with these warnings. Eventually I think we will want to set up a mailing list for this or we will start sending duplicate messages. regards, dan carpenter