[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdViQbA9yr=V81AxD7yij44Ks3Z1q-j2E6kPQBFOXWK5iQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 09:54:44 +0200
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To: Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
Cc: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
kbuild-all@...ts.01.org,
clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>,
Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
"open list:SERIAL DRIVERS" <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] serial: extend compile-test coverage
Hi Johan,
On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 9:52 AM Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 09:40:38AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 9:37 AM Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 09:11:50AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 3:20 AM kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com> wrote:
> > > > > >> drivers/tty/serial/serial_txx9.c:987:12: warning: no previous prototype for function 'early_serial_txx9_setup' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
> > > > > int __init early_serial_txx9_setup(struct uart_port *port)
> > > > > ^
> > > > > drivers/tty/serial/serial_txx9.c:987:1: note: declare 'static' if the function is not intended to be used outside of this translation unit
> > > > > int __init early_serial_txx9_setup(struct uart_port *port)
> > > > > ^
> > > > > static
> > > > > 1 warning generated.
> > > >
> > > > This function is called from arch/mips/txx9/generic/setup.c, and does
> > > > have a forward declaration in arch/mips/include/asm/txx9/generic.h.
> > > > Unfortunately the latter cannot be included from the driver, unless
> > > > the || COMPILE_TEST is dropped again.
> > >
> > > Thanks, Geert. I was just about to send a v2 without the txx9 hunk.
> >
> > well, I guess apart from this (W=1!) warning, this driver still
> > compile-tests fine.
> > Do we consider hard-to-fix W=1 warnings to be legitimate blockers
> > for enabling compile-testing?
>
> Since the build bots have enabled them (and people have turned it into a
> crusade to suppress every W=1 warning by any means) I think it's
> reasonable to not introduce new ones knowingly.
>
> And I'm not too motivated right now to try to work around this one
> myself. The idea here was just to enable COMPILE_TEST for drivers that
> did not have any build-time dependencies.
OK.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
Powered by blists - more mailing lists