[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4299c79e33f22e237e42515ea436f187d8beb32e.camel@perches.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 13:34:48 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc: Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
ksummit-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
Steve French <stfrench@...rosoft.com>,
"Tobin C. Harding" <me@...in.cc>
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH v2 0/3] Maintainer Entry Profiles
On Thu, 2019-09-12 at 13:01 -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> Another argument in favor of W=1 is that the formatting of kernel-doc
> headers is checked only if W=1 is passed to make.
Actually, but for the fact there are far too many
to generally enable that warning right now,
(an x86-64 defconfig has more than 1000)
that sounds pretty reasonable to me.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists