linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/13] Rid W=1 warnings in CPUFreq

lists.openwall.net		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 linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 15 Jul 2020 12:08:00 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:     Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc:     rjw@...ysocki.net, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] Rid W=1 warnings in CPUFreq

On 15-07-20, 07:32, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jul 2020, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> 
> > On 14-07-20, 15:50, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > This set is part of a larger effort attempting to clean-up W=1
> > > kernel builds, which are currently overwhelmingly riddled with
> > > niggly little warnings.
> > > 
> > > After these patches are applied, the build system no longer
> > > complains about any W=0 nor W=1 level warnings in drivers/cpufreq.
> > 
> > And you need to rebase this stuff of pm/linux-next, as there are some
> > changes in cpufreq.c there.
> 
> It's based on the latest -next.  Is pm/linux-next in -next?

Yes it is. Actually my bad, I based it on my next which didn't had
pm/linux-next :)

-- 
viresh