Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH v2 0/3] Maintainer Entry Profiles

Matthew Wilcox
2019-09-13T12:56:43Z

It's easy enough to move the kernel-doc warnings out from under W=1. I only
out them there to avoid overwhelming us with new warnings. If they're
mostly fixed now, let's make checking them the default.

On Thu., Sep. 12, 2019, 16:01 Bart Van Assche, <bvanassche@acm.org> wrote:

> On 9/12/19 8:34 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Thu, 2019-09-12 at 14:31 +0100, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> >> On 9/11/19 5:40 PM, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
> >>> * The patch must compile without warnings (make C=1
> CF="-D__CHECK_ENDIAN__")
> >>> and does not incur any zeroday test robot complaints.
> >>
> >> How about adding W=1 to that make command?
> >
> > That's rather too compiler version dependent and new
> > warnings frequently get introduced by new compiler versions.
>
> I've never observed this myself. If a new compiler warning is added to
> gcc and if it produces warnings that are not useful for kernel code
> usually Linus or someone else is quick to suppress that warning.
>
> Another argument in favor of W=1 is that the formatting of kernel-doc
> headers is checked only if W=1 is passed to make.
>
> Bart.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ksummit-discuss mailing list
> Ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ksummit-discuss