[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180817211648.GK28676@mellanox.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2018 15:16:48 -0600
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
linux-rdma <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Please pull RDMA subsystem changes
On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 01:50:05PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 12:44 PM Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > Ok, everything but the max_sge thing was trivial. I just took yours.
>
> Oh, and doing the full test compile, I notice there are new warnings.
>
> That is *NOT* ok.
I expect to send you a pull request to remove all of this next
week. This is fall out from the SMC merge conflict reversion.
> The whole "x is deprecated" is not a useful warning. If you can't
> remove something, making it a reminder for yourself for later is not
> an acceptable excuse for bothering everybody else with the warning,
> and possibly having other issues hidden because by the time there are
> expected warnings, people will start ignoring the unexpected ones too.
>
> So "__deprecated" is for stuff that really isn't used any more, to
> catch possible new users. People have tried to use it for anything
> else, but it's always been a much bigger pain than it is worth.
In this case it has become confusing what
CONFIG_ENABLE_WARN_DEPRECATED is for.
If the kernel is supposed to compile warning free with that config
set, then why have the config at all - it does nothing, by definition?
Would you like a patch to remove that CONFIG option?
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists