From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758627Ab0JHPGB (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Oct 2010 11:06:01 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:50134 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757334Ab0JHPF7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Oct 2010 11:05:59 -0400 Message-ID: <4CAF3356.8080103@suse.cz> Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2010 17:05:58 +0200 From: Michal Marek User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.7) Gecko/20100714 SUSE/3.1.1 Thunderbird/3.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Am=E9rico_Wang?= Cc: Catalin Marinas , Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Arnaud Lacombe Subject: Re: linux-next: build warnings after merge of the kbuild-current tree References: <20101006114433.4fbe86ef.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <4CAC59D4.5010505@suse.cz> <1286365363.4281.5.camel@e102109-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20101008145141.GA13688@sepie.suse.cz> <20101008150343.GF4088@hack> In-Reply-To: <20101008150343.GF4088@hack> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 8.10.2010 17:03, Américo Wang wrote: > On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 04:51:41PM +0200, Michal Marek wrote: >> >>>From ca22d6b4c7c26a8ff9092036a9524bc5ba817277 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >> From: Michal Marek >> Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2010 16:40:27 +0200 >> Subject: [PATCH] kconfig: Temporarily disable dependency warnings >> >> After fixing a use-after-free bug in kconfig, a 'make defconfig' or >> 'make allmodconfig' fills the screen with warnings that were not >> detected before. Given that we are close to the release now, disable the >> warnings temporarily and deal with them after 2.6.36. >> >> Signed-off-by: Michal Marek >> >> diff --git a/scripts/kconfig/symbol.c b/scripts/kconfig/symbol.c >> index 943712c..d3cfa49 100644 >> --- a/scripts/kconfig/symbol.c >> +++ b/scripts/kconfig/symbol.c >> @@ -350,7 +350,7 @@ void sym_calc_value(struct symbol *sym) >> } >> } >> calc_newval: >> - if (sym->dir_dep.tri == no && sym->rev_dep.tri != no) { >> + if (0 && sym->dir_dep.tri == no && sym->rev_dep.tri != no) { >> fprintf(stderr, "warning: ("); >> expr_fprint(sym->rev_dep.expr, stderr); >> fprintf(stderr, ") selects %s which has unmet direct dependencies (", > > Well, this is an odd way to comment a block of code out, > usually we use #ifdef 0 instead. :) Right, but that's a tiny technical detail now :). Michal