From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752760AbcG2KTn (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Jul 2016 06:19:43 -0400 Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([78.46.96.112]:45143 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752016AbcG2KTl (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Jul 2016 06:19:41 -0400 Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2016 12:19:32 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Michal Marek , Sam Ravnborg , lkml , Michael Matz , Linux Kbuild mailing list , x86-ml Subject: Re: [PATCH] Kbuild: Move -Wmaybe-uninitialized to W=1 Message-ID: <20160729101932.GA27543@nazgul.tnic> References: <20140616132045.GE8170@pd.tnic> <19202646.LtBeEUK5Qq@wuerfel> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <19202646.LtBeEUK5Qq@wuerfel> User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.0 (2016-04-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 12:08:51PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > Let me try to get to the bottom of this, maybe we can get the warning > back in the future. It has found a number of actual bugs. The majority > of -Wmaybe-uninitialized warnings that I fixed in linux-next were > false positives (maybe four out of five) but I would think the reason So this is exactly the problem: we should not fix perfectly fine code just so that gcc remains quiet. So when you say "fixed false positives" you actually mean, "changed it so that gcc -Wmaybe-u... doesn't fire" right? And we should not do that. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply. --