Messages in this thread | | | From | Arnd Bergmann <> | Date | Fri, 26 Jun 2020 16:43:36 +0200 | Subject | Re: [patch 10/32] linux/bits.h: fix unsigned less than zero warnings |
| |
On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 4:09 PM Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 5:03 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 3:24 PM Andy Shevchenko > > <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 2:37 PM Rikard Falkeborn > > > <rikard.falkeborn@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Den fre 26 juni 2020 08:32Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> skrev: > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > I'll just say no and point to this email next time someone complains instead. > > > > > > "No" is not constructive here. People can be annoyed with warning > > > messages, but the real issue here are the various CI systems which > > > send a lot of spam because of that. As a maintainer I would need to > > > drop CI in order to see a good patch. If Linus considers that warning > > > useless, then probably you can change your patch to do what he > > > proposed. > > > > How about moving that warning from W=1 to W=2? Generally speaking > > I'd expect W=1 warnings to be in a category of "it's generally better to > > address this in the code, but we can't turn it on by default because the > > output gets too noisy", as opposed to W=2 meaning "this sometimes > > finds a real problem, but fixing the warning often makes code worse." > > It would work for me if it had been > a) documented (I didn't check if it had been already done, though); > b) understood by all CIs in the same way (see a) as well :-).
I checked the 'make help' output, which describes them as
make W=n [targets] Enable extra build checks, n=1,2,3 where 1: warnings which may be relevant and do not occur too often 2: warnings which occur quite often but may still be relevant 3: more obscure warnings, can most likely be ignored Multiple levels can be combined with W=12 or W=123
which is less specific than the interpretation I had in mind but I think still fits a).
Arnd
| |