From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Borislav Petkov Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Silence even more W=2 warnings Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2014 21:21:52 +0200 Message-ID: <20140922192152.GD4709@pd.tnic> References: <1411140580-20909-1-git-send-email-jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com> <20140922153355.GB4510@pd.tnic> <20140922184049.GB4709@pd.tnic> <3199350A-89CE-4BE7-8FE4-CA8CE4F87622@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Return-path: Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([78.46.96.112]:56811 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751130AbaIVTV6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Sep 2014 15:21:58 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3199350A-89CE-4BE7-8FE4-CA8CE4F87622@intel.com> Sender: linux-sparse-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org To: "Rustad, Mark D" Cc: "Kirsher, Jeffrey T" , "sparse@chrisli.org" , "linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 06:59:23PM +0000, Rustad, Mark D wrote: > It is helpful for using the warnings to look for problems or even just risks. That's what W= builds are for. > Right now the number of warnings generated when using W=2 simply tells > people to never use W=2. I showed you how to use W=2 and 3 for that matter - pipe the output into a file and grep away. > That severely limits the value of a useful tool. A checkpatch warning > doesn't mean to never do that, just that it needs a critical look and > justification. That is certainly true of every patch I made that uses > those macros. Sorry, if you need to shut up the compiler by adding code with the sole purpose to not issue a warning for otherwise perfectly fine code, then something's wrong with the whole endeavor in the first place. There's a reason W= warnings are disabled in the default build. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine. --