From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: [PATCH] Illustration of warning explosion silliness Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 19:18:22 -0400 Message-ID: <451C583E.8090501@garzik.org> References: <20060928005830.GA25694@havoc.gtf.org> <20060927183507.5ef244f3.akpm@osdl.org> <451B29FA.7020502@garzik.org> <20060927203417.f07674de.akpm@osdl.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:31376 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751027AbWI1XSZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Sep 2006 19:18:25 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20060927203417.f07674de.akpm@osdl.org> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Andrew Morton Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Greg KH , LKML , Linus Torvalds Andrew Morton wrote: > There, I feel better now. If you want to see the other warnings, set > CONFIG_ENABLE_MUST_CHECK=n. While Googling around for Hobson's Choice[1], I realized that we are presented with the utterly apropos Morton's Fork: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morton's_Fork With CONFIG_ENABLE_MUST_CHECK warning explosion, we must choose between seeing warnings in our own code, but missing __must_check bugs, and seeing all the __must_check bugs but obscuring our own day-to-day devel problems. In the future, I would hope that it would be reasonable to merge a feature like this along with the cleanups that avoid a warning explosion. Jeff [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobson's_choice