| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 15:06:35 -0800 (PST) From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org> To: Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@...il.com> cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, trivial@...nel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Don't compare unsigned variable for <0 in sys_prctl() On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Jesper Juhl wrote: > > > Friends don't let friends use "-W". > > Hehe, ok, I'll stop cleaning this stuff up then. > Nice little hobby out the window there ;) You might want to look at some of the other warnings gcc spits out, but this class isn't one of them. Other warnings we have added over the years (and that really _are_ good warnings) have included the "-Wstrict-prototypes", and some other ones. If you can pinpoint _which_ gcc warning flag it is that causes gcc to emit the bogus ones, you _could_ try "-W -Wno-xyz-warning", which should cause gcc to enable all the "other" warnings, but then not the "xyz-warning" that causes problems. Of course, there is often a reason why a warning is in "-W" but not in "-Wall". Most of the time it's sign that the warning is bogus. Not always, though - we do tend to want to be fairly strict, and Wstrict-prototypes is an example of a _good_ warning that is not in -Wall. Linus - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists