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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Mon, 6 Oct 2014 15:27:56 -0700
To:	Joe Perches <>
Cc:	David Miller <>,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: core: Quiet W=1 warnings for unused vars
 and static functions

On Mon, Oct 06, 2014 at 03:04:24PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-10-06 at 17:56 -0400, David Miller wrote:
> > From: Joe Perches <>
> > Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2014 14:51:38 -0700
> > 
> > > Reduce noise when compiling W=1.
> []
> > BTW, this patch reminds me that if people think there are
> > subdirectories where we can turn on things like -Werror in the
> > networking I would be very happy to apply such patches.
> []
> > Things like net/core/ for example should be doable for sure.
> I don't have any significant opposition to -Werror, but
> I think there are real arguments _against_ using -Werror.
> I think the primary one is new compiler versions have a
> tendency to add new warnings for various things that can
> unnecessarily and unpredictably break the build.

-Werror is a bad idea, even on a per-directory basis.  However,
-Werror=specific-warning is a great idea.  We should add that for
high-value warnings that have been entirely eliminated in a directory.

- Josh Triplett
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists