From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michal Marek Subject: Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the kbuild tree Date: Mon, 02 May 2011 17:31:08 +0200 Message-ID: <4DBECE3C.5070008@suse.cz> References: <20110502121817.645d544e.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20110502022417.GA11804@redhat.com> <20110502134524.40da4245.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20110502142454.a7091ad5.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20110502145338.7be2fdbc.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20110502111337.GA15769@sepie.suse.cz> <10763.1304349435@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <10763.1304349435@localhost> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Dave Jones , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Sam Ravnborg List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org On 2.5.2011 17:17, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote: > On Mon, 02 May 2011 13:13:37 +0200, Michal Marek said: > >> +# We test for support of the -Wunused-but-set-variable option, because >> +# some version of gcc will happily accept any -Wno-* switch and complain >> +# later during build. >> +ifeq ($(call cc-option-yn, -Wunused-but-set-variable), y) >> +KBUILD_CFLAGS += -Wno-unused-but-set-variable >> +endif > > Do we need to do this more generically for all the other -Wno-foo > options under the various W={123} options? I only see -Wno-unused-parameter in scripts/Makefile.build and that should be supported by any gcc version. Also please have a look at http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=130433840412201&w=2, which is an updated version. Michal