From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 488A1BA9 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2019 15:19:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BB542E6 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2019 15:19:23 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2019 12:19:18 -0300 From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab To: Laurent Pinchart Message-ID: <20190619121918.3d5eb91b@coco.lan> In-Reply-To: <20190619144808.GI21753@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> References: <20190614124305.65eb8dbd@coco.lan> <1560527386.27102.23.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20190614130456.6c339c01@coco.lan> <1560528994.27102.34.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20190614144836.0a71ebe5@coco.lan> <20190617103115.670bf968@coco.lan> <20190619075351.GP28859@kadam> <20190619113902.76bd169a@coco.lan> <20190619144808.GI21753@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: ksummit , James Bottomley , media-submaintainers@linuxtv.org, kbuild@01.org, Dan Carpenter Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [media-submaintainers] [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Pull network and Patch Acceptance Consistency List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Em Wed, 19 Jun 2019 17:48:08 +0300 Laurent Pinchart escreveu: > Hi Mauro, > > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 11:39:02AM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > > Em Wed, 19 Jun 2019 10:33:23 +0200 Daniel Vetter escreveu: > > > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 9:56 AM Dan Carpenter wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 10:31:15AM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > > > > > Also, usually, the bots don't build with W=1, as, on most subsystems, > > > > > this cause lots of warnings[1]. > > > > > > > > > > [1] On media, we have zero warnings with W=1. > > > > > > > > We could ask the kbuild devs if they would consider making W=1 a per > > > > tree option. > > > > > > No need to ask, just add a Kconfig which sets additional cflags for > > > you for your tree and your good. The usual combinatorial testing will > > > discover the new warnings. That's at least what we do for i915.ko > > > (including -Werror). Gets the job done. > > > > While this works, having a W=1 per tree would, IMHO, work better, as, > > as new warnings get added to W=1, we'll get those for free. > > > > - > > > > I don't like the idea of having -Werror being automatically added, as > > this may cause problems when people try to compile with a different > > compiler version - or on some weird architectures. > > It's not automatic though, if it depends on a Kconfig option that is > disabled by default. The built bots can enable it, while users would > ignore it. That being said, having it as a per-tree build bot option > should work as well. Having a Kconfig option is OK. What I'm saying is that I don't like the idea of having something like: ccflags-y := -Werror Unconditionally added on some Makefile. Having it depending on a Kconfig option (or manually added with something like "make CFLAGS=-Werror") is OK. We had -Werror unconditionally enabled in the past on a couple of Makefiles under media. - It sounds, however, that there's not a consensus with that regards, as some subsystems enableit unconditionally: ccflags-y := -Werror Others enable when there's some other make option: ifeq (, $(findstring -W,$(EXTRA_CFLAGS))) ccflags-y += -Werror endif And yet other ones have their own subsystem-specific option to enable it: ccflags-$(CONFIG_PPC_WERROR) += -Werror Thanks, Mauro