From: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
To: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
Cc: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] btrfs-progs: enable -Wmissing-prototypes for debug builds
Date: Tue, 2 May 2023 10:25:33 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230502142533.GA1493492@perftesting> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230502133045.GD8111@suse.cz>
On Tue, May 02, 2023 at 03:30:45PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
> On Tue, May 02, 2023 at 08:00:57PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 2023/5/2 19:41, David Sterba wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 02, 2023 at 09:29:30AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> > >> During development I'm a little surpirsed we don't have
> > >> -Wmissing-prototypes enabled even for debug builds.
> > >
> > > The build supports W=levels like kernel and -Wmissing-prototypes is in
> > > level 1. In some cases we may want to add the warnings to be on by
> > > default for debugging builds though.
> >
> > I just did a quick search for the word "missing" of progs Makefile,
> > unforunately no hit, thus I doubt if it's even in debug level 1.
> >
> > And the missing prototypes warning is by default enabled for kernel.
>
> $ grep missing Makefile.extrawarn
> warning-1 += -Wmissing-declarations
> warning-1 += -Wmissing-format-attribute
> warning-1 += $(call cc-option, -Wmissing-prototypes)
> warning-1 += $(call cc-option, -Wmissing-include-dirs)
> warning-1 += $(call cc-disable-warning, missing-field-initializers)
> warning-2 += $(call cc-option, -Wmissing-field-initializers)
>
> > [...]
> > >>
> > >> +#include "sha.h"
> > >
> > > This does not seem necessary, include whole file just for one prototype.
> >
> > This is necessary as we would define a global function, without
> > including the header we got the missing prototype warning.
> >
> > All the other comments make sense and I would update the patchset.
> >
> >
> > The only other concern is, would this extra warning causing more hassles
> > for Josef to sync the kernel and progs code?
>
> I don't know yet but it is possible that it would. In that case the separate
> patch would make it easier to enable once all warnings are fixed, I can keep it
> at the top of the branch.
Do you want me to run these warnings through my series and re-send? That may be
faster than trying to merge everything together. Thanks,
Josef
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-02 14:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-02 1:29 [PATCH] btrfs-progs: enable -Wmissing-prototypes for debug builds Qu Wenruo
2023-05-02 9:30 ` Anand Jain
2023-05-02 11:41 ` David Sterba
2023-05-02 12:00 ` Qu Wenruo
2023-05-02 13:30 ` David Sterba
2023-05-02 14:25 ` Josef Bacik [this message]
2023-05-02 14:51 ` David Sterba
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=20230502142533.GA1493492@perftesting \
--to=josef@toxicpanda.com \
--cc=dsterba@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=wqu@suse.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox