On Mon, Jun 08, 2020 at 12:09:01PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:

On Mon, Jun 08, 2020 at 03:46:57PM +0800, Li Zhijian wrote:

quoted

On 6/6/20 12:35 AM, Mark Brown wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

arch/arm64/kernel/vdso/vgettimeofday.c:9:5: warning: no previous prototype for '__kernel_clock_gettime' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
9 | int __kernel_clock_gettime(clockid_t clock,
|     ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

quoted

quoted

I'm not seeing this here and what we're doing is in line with the
existing idiom as can be seen from the __kernel_clock_gettime() code
flagging the same thing.  Possibly an old/outdated toolchain?

quoted

Actually, the origin mail contained 4 warnings,  and only one is *new*, as
the mail mentioned that

quoted

quoted

All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>, old ones prefixed by <<):

quoted

0Day/LKP had marked the *new* ones prefixed by '>>'

My point here is that all the warnings, both old and new, look spurious
and the new warning comes from following the pattern that generates the
existing warnings.  I'm not seeing any of those warnings locally or in
other build services like KernelCI.

Thanks Mark for the input. Here the 0-day kernel bot uses W=1 to build which
is mentioned as part of reproduce step.

reproduce (this is a W=1 build):

And we just add FAQ at https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki/LKP-FAQ#how-is-one-meant-to-act-on-w1-reports-like--wmissing-prototypes
to explain the the missing-prototypes warning, hope this can provide
extra information.

Thanks

_______________________________________________
kbuild-all mailing list -- kbuild-all@lists.01.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kbuild-all-leave@lists.01.org

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel