From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BBEFC433F5 for ; Mon, 28 Mar 2022 17:52:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S244775AbiC1Rxi (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Mar 2022 13:53:38 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:35690 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S244795AbiC1Rxf (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Mar 2022 13:53:35 -0400 Received: from ams.source.kernel.org (ams.source.kernel.org [145.40.68.75]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2655359A41; Mon, 28 Mar 2022 10:51:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ams.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D0884B811A1; Mon, 28 Mar 2022 17:51:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 24379C004DD; Mon, 28 Mar 2022 17:51:50 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1648489910; bh=DWQyFizvX5sbX4m+SuMr+oxJyqApObYm578W79HPAoA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=DDnO5fO8JyNVHKzP7WEXuKZG4DVN1sBlBlZwFOGPANJY+3+8NijmGPyNkD8Hagnh0 bglhcK9ilnZrBYyMJ/m8jj+N+fftuVDMqLAt6T7MGkOET4P4rZ5Pc3FvRk5mW5RroL L/3PM7T2UiUMtBNf2iRz8+uj1QmvoG5AqzeRB4FWHAf8VhTc4xdTefVeNcXyQt2MNe TrWWofxwFxMJR2qGgPd8qHDgDx7t4mncGNFvVRK0fgvx7ks/t6YyDtieyYDhcdNobw +2Gej+RYDgP42O8GBKLBuqzkz9B1NBYhjRkABc1IAq2nwRT1u0/TS3XkCpL9NWYSKm EWU0TXA7cSWHQ== Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2022 10:51:48 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Andrew Lunn Cc: davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, corbet@lwn.net, bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, f.fainelli@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH net 09/13] docs: netdev: make the testing requirement more stringent Message-ID: <20220328105148.21935ca2@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20220327025400.2481365-1-kuba@kernel.org> <20220327025400.2481365-10-kuba@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 27 Mar 2022 18:42:59 +0200 Andrew Lunn wrote: > > What level of testing is expected before I submit my change? > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > -If your changes are against ``net-next``, the expectation is that you > > -have tested by layering your changes on top of ``net-next``. Ideally > > -you will have done run-time testing specific to your change, but at a > > -minimum, your changes should survive an ``allyesconfig`` and an > > -``allmodconfig`` build without new warnings or failures. > > +At the very minimum your changes must survive an ``allyesconfig`` and an > > +``allmodconfig`` build with ``W=1`` set without new warnings or failures. > > Doesn't the patchwork buildbot also have C=1 ? You have been pointing > out failures for C=1, so it probably should be documented here. We have a number of cases where C=1 failures are false positives. Sparse is not getting much love these days, unfortunately. I didn't want to force people to bend over backwards to fix stuff we can let fly upstream. I can't think of a case where W=1 was okay.