From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alan Cox Subject: Re: Look Ma, da kernel is b0rken Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 21:41:14 +0000 Message-ID: <20121205214114.0bb545f1@pyramind.ukuu.org.uk> References: <20121205070901.GA12123@rhlx01.hs-esslingen.de> <20121205142935.GA12119@liondog.tnic> <20121205152756.5afec12c@pyramind.ukuu.org.uk> <20121205153121.GA28556@liondog.tnic> <20121205154749.2af4ef36@pyramind.ukuu.org.uk> <20121206075721.18c0c05aa767b330f47d77eb@canb.auug.org.au> <20121205211244.GA6239@liondog.tnic> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20121205211244.GA6239@liondog.tnic> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Borislav Petkov Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Andrew Morton , Andreas Mohr , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Li Shaohua , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 22:12:45 +0100 Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 07:57:21AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 15:47:49 +0000 Alan Cox wrote: > > > And yes btw we should turn this option on in -next, and get these sort of > > > things out of the tree for good. More importantly it'll mean anyone > > > adding another one gets a whine on the spot. > > > > While I appreciate your confidence, I don't notice quite a few new > > warnings (because there are so many of them already :-(). Is there some > > reason to not turn this on in our "normal" builds? Does it produce many > > false positives? > > Yes, it produces a huge number of warnings which need weeding out (some > of them are false positives and some of them are simply unfixable due to > design decisions in the kernel, etc, etc): > > $ make W=123 drivers/pnp/pnpacpi/core.o 2> w.log I was just talking about the always true/always false stuff !