[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20121205214114.0bb545f1@pyramind.ukuu.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 21:41:14 +0000
From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andreas Mohr <andi@...as.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Li Shaohua <shaohua.li@...el.com>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Look Ma, da kernel is b0rken
On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 22:12:45 +0100
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 07:57:21AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 15:47:49 +0000 Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> > > And yes btw we should turn this option on in -next, and get these sort of
> > > things out of the tree for good. More importantly it'll mean anyone
> > > adding another one gets a whine on the spot.
> >
> > While I appreciate your confidence, I don't notice quite a few new
> > warnings (because there are so many of them already :-(). Is there some
> > reason to not turn this on in our "normal" builds? Does it produce many
> > false positives?
>
> Yes, it produces a huge number of warnings which need weeding out (some
> of them are false positives and some of them are simply unfixable due to
> design decisions in the kernel, etc, etc):
>
> $ make W=123 drivers/pnp/pnpacpi/core.o 2> w.log
I was just talking about the always true/always false stuff !
--
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