linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] kbuild: implement several W= levels

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 21 Apr 2011 14:58:29 -0700
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
Cc:	Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>,
	linux-kbuild <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] kbuild: implement several W= levels

On Thu, 2011-04-21 at 23:39 +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> Building a kernel with "make W=1" produce far too much noise
> to be usefull.
> Divide the warning options in three groups:
> W=1 - usefull warning options
> W=2 - noisy but semi usefull warnign options
> W=3 - almost pure noise options
> +warning-1 := -Wextra
[]
> +warning-2 += -Waggregate-return

This is a different form for this first warning-2 declaration
than the first warning-1 declaration.

Maybe this should be := instead?

Maybe there's a way to do something akin to

warning_type(level, option)

So these become

warning_type(1, extra)
warning_type(2, aggregate-return)

etc.


--
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/