From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
To: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>
Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: drop -Wall and related disables from cflags as redundant
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2023 11:49:55 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87h6my6evg.fsf@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87o7h66fti.fsf@intel.com>
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023, Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 09 Oct 2023, Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org> wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 08, 2023 at 12:28:46AM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
>>> On Fri, Oct 6, 2023 at 9:35 PM Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > The kernel top level Makefile, and recently scripts/Makefile.extrawarn,
>>> > have included -Wall, and the disables -Wno-format-security and
>>> > $(call cc-disable-warning,frame-address,) for a very long time. They're
>>> > redundant in our local subdir-ccflags-y and can be dropped.
>>> >
>>> > Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>>> > Cc: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
>>> > Cc: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
>>> > Cc: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>
>>> > Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
>>>
>>>
>>> I made a similar suggestion in the past
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/dri-devel/20190515043753.9853-1-yamada.masahiro@socionext.com/
>>>
>>> So, I am glad that Intel has decided to de-duplicate the flags.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I think you can drop more flags.
>>>
>>> For example,
>>>
>>> subdir-ccflags-y += -Wno-sign-compare
>>>
>>>
>>> It is set by scripts/Makefile.extrawarn
>>> unless W=3 is passed.
>>>
>>>
>>> If W=3 is set by a user, -Wsign-compare should be warned
>>> as it is the user's request.
>>>
>>>
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/Makefile negates W=3.
>>> There is no good reason to do so.
>>>
>>>
>>> Same applied to
>>>
>>>
>>> subdir-ccflags-y += -Wno-shift-negative-value
>>
>> As I point out in my review of the second patch [1], I am not sure these
>> should be dropped because -Wextra turns these warnings back on, at least
>> for clang according to this build report [2] and my own testing, so they
>> need to be disabled again.
>
> Yeah. The focus is on enabling W=1 warnings by default for i915. I get
> that the disables we have to add to achieve that also disable some W=2
> and W=3 warnings. But taking all of that into account requires
> duplicating even more of Makefile.extrawarn (checking for warning
> levels, maintaining parity with the different levels, etc.).
>
> I guess we could check if KBUILD_EXTRA_WARN does not have any of 1, 2,
> or 3, but very few places outside of the build system look at
> KBUILD_EXTRA_WARN, so feels wrong.
This is the simplest I could think of:
# The following turn off the warnings enabled by -Wextra
ifeq ($(findstring 2, $(KBUILD_EXTRA_WARN)),)
KBUILD_CFLAGS += -Wno-missing-field-initializers
KBUILD_CFLAGS += -Wno-type-limits
KBUILD_CFLAGS += -Wno-shift-negative-value
endif
ifeq ($(findstring 3, $(KBUILD_EXTRA_WARN)),)
KBUILD_CFLAGS += -Wno-sign-compare
endif
Masahiro, I'd like to get your feedback on which to choose,
unconditionally silencing the W=2/W=3 warnings for i915, or looking at
KBUILD_EXTRA_WARN.
Not silencing them is not an option, because we also use -Werror
locally.
BR,
Jani.
>
> BR,
> Jani.
>
>
>>
>> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/20231006174550.GC3359308@dev-arch.thelio-3990X/
>> [2]: https://lore.kernel.org/202310070011.Fji48IBk-lkp@intel.com/
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Nathan.
--
Jani Nikula, Intel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-10 8:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-06 12:34 [PATCH 0/2] drm/i915: align with W=1 warnings Jani Nikula
2023-10-06 12:34 ` [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: drop -Wall and related disables from cflags as redundant Jani Nikula
2023-10-06 17:02 ` Nathan Chancellor
2023-10-06 21:12 ` Nick Desaulniers
2023-10-07 15:28 ` Masahiro Yamada
2023-10-09 16:38 ` Nathan Chancellor
2023-10-10 8:29 ` Jani Nikula
2023-10-10 8:49 ` Jani Nikula [this message]
2023-10-10 15:46 ` [Intel-gfx] " Nick Desaulniers
2023-10-11 7:31 ` Jani Nikula
2023-10-06 12:34 ` [PATCH 2/2] drm/i915: enable W=1 warnings by default Jani Nikula
2023-10-06 16:49 ` [Intel-gfx] " kernel test robot
2023-10-06 17:45 ` Nathan Chancellor
2023-10-10 8:33 ` Jani Nikula
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=87h6my6evg.fsf@intel.com \
--to=jani.nikula@intel.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=masahiroy@kernel.org \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.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