Re: [PATCH (set 1) 00/20] Rid W=1 warnings from GPU
From: Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>
Date: 2023-08-24 12:09:59
Also in:
amd-gfx, dri-devel, linux-media, linux-tegra, lkml, nouveau
On Thu, 24 Aug 2023, Lee Jones wrote:
On Thu, 24 Aug 2023, Jani Nikula wrote:quoted
On Thu, 24 Aug 2023, Lee Jones [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
This set is part of a larger effort attempting to clean-up W=1 kernel builds, which are currently overwhelmingly riddled with niggly little warnings.The next question is, how do we keep it W=1 clean going forward?My plan was to fix them all, then move each warning to W=0.
Some history: - Starting with v5.8-rc1: 18867 - 2020-07-01: 18089 - 2020-07-07: 17288 - 2020-07-17: 15762 - 2020-07-20: 15724 - 2020-07-23: 15116 - 2020-08-12: 15184 - 2020-10-19: 10909 - 2020-11-04: 9385 - 2021-01-04: 5478 - 2021-01-12 4749 - 2021-01-29 4911 - 2021-04-07 3594 - 2021-05-20 2938 - 2021-07-01 2587 - 2023-02-10 2587 - 2023-08-22 1650
Arnd recently submitted a set doing just that for a bunch of them. https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230811140327.3754597-1-arnd@kernel.org/ (local) I like to think a bunch of this is built on top of my previous efforts. GPU is a particularly tricky though - the warnings seem to come in faster than I can squash them. Maybe the maintainers can find a way to test new patches on merge?quoted
Most people don't use W=1 because it's too noisy, so it's a bit of a catch-22. In i915, we enable a lot of W=1 warnings using subdir-ccflags-y in our Makefile. For CI/developer use we also enable kernel-doc warnings by default. Should we start enabling some of those warning flags in drm/Makefile to to keep the entire subsystem warning free?That would we awesome! We'd just need buy-in.
-- Lee Jones [李琼斯] _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel