From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qt1-f196.google.com (mail-qt1-f196.google.com [209.85.160.196]) by mail.openembedded.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E877B7D20D for ; Wed, 17 Apr 2019 17:15:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qt1-f196.google.com with SMTP id v20so28179689qtv.12 for ; Wed, 17 Apr 2019 10:15:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=K2vzHpgYnCtJVcyz9hWcbb+T74AFWL0TS+bYp/Q8HJE=; b=htHs/LfD2wuCqQPb9DxV7l/rJZUMq2oGbgP5jc5UMyCyXl5Y//cMTOmUyvtFdBinPW kzrRxOn0FSvZ5I9kW1l3lFEMewLhpGrdtNSfz9j6P+XdOJcHfScZdZ/MDD37AGpMIXl0 vfNP3J6gZk+niKxNJWKuyVajvbvw9hA3/1PxWG7tdQutUDBlT+fuSxZprFCXTno8Xj80 MlMuT4q3MzX/P5Rq69ZseCbpXczCypAKvD4fDI5oII5lcZ1Gy+OPXxWjN/kjYVsth0qP RfOJRY/IEIdJEso2lgiFlx57e9/fbbd4+NnTTCJ4KDdnG6Tnbd8RaeMzpfhFkn2CLXKJ I02w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=K2vzHpgYnCtJVcyz9hWcbb+T74AFWL0TS+bYp/Q8HJE=; b=CWyakKT7u85vvldhM6vecxBCr8Vl1dQrDRiiqAsdcQ6t6fXMNPcOOxXvgfL7nARpq/ 6EBhBfY1ikDogXOFiDvw5f0Yr7Cs/9luRuMreorgycwxu2YR3M0DsBw6/TQtM5tpY3O2 ClL1pGJhD3aey+3/VND5LWV9TwwB7Ej0dosvbLfbuYUGsyqBnpsANV0Kq3HF8AJEgOsI 4+l2ebwxDIAOYlxfAtSCiL7cUhg6vUUhlgCyDhU93XXlIYrCOpdLktAhbqyF0WIfurMD 6Aac0WOjker+tD5lNszo3PzkdmcOPX4EcUY5Fjn7Y5px0CFUVYd7Qht0MKCaw/o3FP1O 7qwQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAW30uriRLsR/YBOTtJJl3rQYs0Wxgulr8j5EJ7vKB28zVw/Logz LjAhGBAlj2TXaqaQzvxwbbHBCyyr190EC5LvtWg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz4zP6r1V99aFVRhIhD0b+6Y5Yo4EpSyy9Ov7v5oWKnv71KrvVadB+EDWciTzdNTp+JHGcoRfsCX+XmpTR+xKc= X-Received: by 2002:ac8:2f59:: with SMTP id k25mr74777296qta.254.1555521304763; Wed, 17 Apr 2019 10:15:04 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1554777170-58044-1-git-send-email-mingli.yu@windriver.com> <20190415093825.GB4317@localhost> <20190415162156.GA16706@localhost> <5CB5960C.2030408@windriver.com> <5CB6DA7F.3020106@windriver.com> In-Reply-To: <5CB6DA7F.3020106@windriver.com> From: Khem Raj Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2019 10:14:38 -0700 Message-ID: To: "Yu, Mingli" Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer , Adrian Bunk Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] gcc-sanitizers: fix -Werror=maybe-uninitialized issue X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2019 17:15:05 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 12:45 AM Yu, Mingli wrote= : > > > > On 2019=E5=B9=B404=E6=9C=8817=E6=97=A5 02:00, Khem Raj wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 1:40 AM Yu, Mingli wr= ote: > >> > >> > >> > >> On 2019=E5=B9=B404=E6=9C=8816=E6=97=A5 00:21, Adrian Bunk wrote: > >>> On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 07:19:13AM -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > >>>> > >>>> What are you trying to convey ? That=E2=80=99s what I mentioned befo= re 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 t= o build > >>>> then how good would it be if we fix this error especially complex pa= ckages > >>>> 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 pack= ages > >>> 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 debuggi= ng, > >>> but are we talking about debug builds or production builds? > >>> If users would be using DEBUG_OPTIMIZATION in production builds that > >> > >> Thanks Adrian and Khem's response! > >> We indeed don't use DEBUG_OPTIMIZATION in production build. > >> > >> But still comes question: how to silence gcc-sanitizers build failure > >> when debug build enabled? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >>> would be wrong - this will always be a mostly untested situation > >>> with an increased probability of hitting bugs noone else has seen > >>> before. > > > > disable warning as errors. > > Hi Khem, > > I don't quite get what you mean. Disable warning as errors? > > As https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-04/msg00315.html, gcc > upstream thinks the build error is meaningless when compile > gcc-sanitizers with -Og and suggests not use -Og to compile for > gcc-sanitizers. > > So I send out the patch to add the workaround [DEBUG_OPTIMIZATION_append > =3D " -Wno-error"] to silence the error when debug build is enabled for > gcc-sanitizers. > If the workaround isn't suitable, then how to silence the > -Werror=3Dmaybe-uninitialized issue build error when debug build enabled? I was meaning to say that remove -Werror from cmdline completely > > Thanks, > > > > >>> > >>> cu > >>> Adrian > >>> > >