Openembedded Core Discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>
To: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>
Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
	<openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] gcc-sanitizers: fix -Werror=maybe-uninitialized issue
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 19:21:56 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190415162156.GA16706@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMKF1sps-k6m=ZrpuMmhj23ZkmF8C=17hGPscRH-V0cagV-2rw@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 07:19:13AM -0700, Khem Raj wrote:
> 
> What are you trying to convey ? That’s what I mentioned before I began my
> reply however to reiterate my point was if a package is not usually built
> and tested with this combination which is evident because it fails to build
> then how good would it be if we fix this error especially complex packages
> like compilers so is it worth to fix them or disable Og for them

Packages that usually get built and tested with -Og should be pretty rare,
and these specific build failures are better at finding the rare packages
that use -Werror than pointing at potential miscompilations.

From a distribution point of view, a package build with -Werror by 
default is arguably a bug since this frequently breaks when something
is changed (usually the compiler version).

-Og is better suited than the -O that was previously used for debugging,
but are we talking about debug builds or production builds?
If users would be using DEBUG_OPTIMIZATION in production builds that 
would be wrong - this will always be a mostly untested situation
with an increased probability of hitting bugs noone else has seen
before.

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed



  reply	other threads:[~2019-04-15 16:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-03-19  8:44 [PATCH] gcc-sanitizers: fix -Werror=maybe-uninitialized issue mingli.yu
2019-03-26  1:37 ` Yu, Mingli
2019-04-04  9:36 ` Yu, Mingli
2019-04-05 22:01 ` Khem Raj
2019-04-08  6:40   ` [PATCH v2] " mingli.yu
2019-04-09  2:32   ` [PATCH v3] " mingli.yu
2019-04-09  3:53     ` Khem Raj
2019-04-15  9:27       ` Yu, Mingli
2019-04-15  9:38       ` Adrian Bunk
2019-04-15 14:19         ` Khem Raj
2019-04-15 16:21           ` Adrian Bunk [this message]
2019-04-16  8:45             ` Yu, Mingli
2019-04-16 18:00               ` Khem Raj
2019-04-17  7:49                 ` Yu, Mingli
2019-04-17 17:14                   ` Khem Raj
2019-04-22  5:45                     ` Yu, Mingli
2019-04-22  8:41                     ` [PATCH v4] " mingli.yu

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20190415162156.GA16706@localhost \
    --to=bunk@stusta.de \
    --cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
    --cc=raj.khem@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox