From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com>,
LAKML <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Tony Breeds <tony@bakeyournoodle.com>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Updating kernel.org cross compilers?
Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 08:40:22 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170510134019.GB19687@gate.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAK8P3a38bCS2rSwtQzYROfVBQ549akQZKPUJhcwDrWPN4NA1+w@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Arnd, long time no see,
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 09:58:13AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >> So in addition to GCC 7.1 I'd like to have at least GCC 6.3 around,
> >> which builds kernels without warnings today.
> >
> > If you don't want warnings, turn off the warnings or just don't look at
> > them... or fix the problems? Many of the new warnings point out actual
> > problems.
> >
> > Many of those sprintf problems in the kernel have already been fixed.
>
> I've been using gcc-7.0 for a long time and fixed a lot of bugs it found,
> along with more harmless warnings, but I had disabled a couple of
> warning options when I first installed gcc-7 and ended up ignoring
> those.
>
> The exact set of additional options I used is:
>
> -Wimplicit-fallthrough=0 -Wno-duplicate-decl-specifier
> -Wno-int-in-bool-context -Wno-bool-operation -Wno-format-truncation
> -Wno-format-overflow
>
> there were a couple of others that I sent kernel fixes for instead.
> I should probably revisit that list and for each of them either
> only enable it with "make W=1" or fix all known warnings.
> In the long run, I'd actually hope to fix all W=1 warnings too
> and enable them by default.
Most of those usually point out actual problems (at least code that
isn't as clear as it should be). I do hate that first one though.
Segher
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: segher@kernel.crashing.org (Segher Boessenkool)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Updating kernel.org cross compilers?
Date: Wed, 10 May 2017 08:40:22 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170510134019.GB19687@gate.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAK8P3a38bCS2rSwtQzYROfVBQ549akQZKPUJhcwDrWPN4NA1+w@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Arnd, long time no see,
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 09:58:13AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >> So in addition to GCC 7.1 I'd like to have at least GCC 6.3 around,
> >> which builds kernels without warnings today.
> >
> > If you don't want warnings, turn off the warnings or just don't look at
> > them... or fix the problems? Many of the new warnings point out actual
> > problems.
> >
> > Many of those sprintf problems in the kernel have already been fixed.
>
> I've been using gcc-7.0 for a long time and fixed a lot of bugs it found,
> along with more harmless warnings, but I had disabled a couple of
> warning options when I first installed gcc-7 and ended up ignoring
> those.
>
> The exact set of additional options I used is:
>
> -Wimplicit-fallthrough=0 -Wno-duplicate-decl-specifier
> -Wno-int-in-bool-context -Wno-bool-operation -Wno-format-truncation
> -Wno-format-overflow
>
> there were a couple of others that I sent kernel fixes for instead.
> I should probably revisit that list and for each of them either
> only enable it with "make W=1" or fix all known warnings.
> In the long run, I'd actually hope to fix all W=1 warnings too
> and enable them by default.
Most of those usually point out actual problems (at least code that
isn't as clear as it should be). I do hate that first one though.
Segher
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-05-10 14:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-26 14:14 Updating kernel.org cross compilers? Andre Przywara
2017-04-26 14:14 ` Andre Przywara
2017-04-30 3:37 ` Guenter Roeck
2017-04-30 3:37 ` Guenter Roeck
2017-04-30 5:29 ` Segher Boessenkool
2017-04-30 5:29 ` Segher Boessenkool
2017-05-09 14:59 ` Andre Przywara
2017-05-09 14:59 ` Andre Przywara
2017-05-09 16:26 ` Guenter Roeck
2017-05-09 16:26 ` Guenter Roeck
2017-05-09 22:18 ` Segher Boessenkool
2017-05-09 22:18 ` Segher Boessenkool
2017-05-10 7:58 ` Arnd Bergmann
2017-05-10 7:58 ` Arnd Bergmann
2017-05-10 13:40 ` Segher Boessenkool [this message]
2017-05-10 13:40 ` Segher Boessenkool
2017-05-10 19:32 ` Arnd Bergmann
2017-05-10 19:32 ` Arnd Bergmann
2017-05-23 18:15 ` Chris Metcalf
2017-05-23 18:15 ` Chris Metcalf
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=20170510134019.GB19687@gate.crashing.org \
--to=segher@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=andre.przywara@arm.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=tony@bakeyournoodle.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.