[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140922212105.GD3128@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2014 23:21:05 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: "Rustad, Mark D" <mark.d.rustad@...el.com>
Cc: "sparse@...isli.org" <sparse@...isli.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"richard.weinberger@...il.com" <richard.weinberger@...il.com>,
"linux-sparse@...r.kernel.org" <linux-sparse@...r.kernel.org>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"Kirsher, Jeffrey T" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
"computersforpeace@...il.com" <computersforpeace@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: Remove nested extern
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 08:59:32PM +0000, Rustad, Mark D wrote:
> Because I have found that enabling many warnings helps identify problems
> in code and it has been my standard practice since about 1999 to do so.
> The compiler warnings are really just another form of static analysis,
> and I use it routinely on every compile. Here is how routinely: I have
> W=1 in my environment, W=12 is just too painful. I would change that
> default to W=12 if it wasn't insane to do so.
Many warnings are just plain insane and stupid. They're not helping
anybody. There's a very good reason many are disabled. I'm sure you can
find some entertaining discussions on the topic if you search the LKML
archives.
--
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