[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230609201754.GA3961359@dev-arch.thelio-3990X>
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2023 13:17:54 -0700
From: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
To: Hamza Mahfooz <hamza.mahfooz@....com>
Cc: amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>,
Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
"Pan, Xinhui" <Xinhui.Pan@....com>,
David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
Hawking Zhang <Hawking.Zhang@....com>, Le Ma <le.ma@....com>,
Tao Zhou <tao.zhou1@....com>,
YiPeng Chai <YiPeng.Chai@....com>,
James Zhu <James.Zhu@....com>,
Xiaojian Du <Xiaojian.Du@....com>,
Lijo Lazar <lijo.lazar@....com>,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/amd/amdgpu: enable W=1 for amdgpu
+ Masahiro and linux-kbuild
On Fri, Jun 09, 2023 at 12:42:06PM -0400, Hamza Mahfooz wrote:
> We have a clean build with W=1 as of
> commit 12a15dd589ac ("drm/amd/display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm_helpers: Move
> SYNAPTICS_DEVICE_ID into CONFIG_DRM_AMD_DC_DCN ifdef"). So, let's enable
> these checks unconditionally for the entire module to catch these errors
> during development.
>
> Cc: Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>
> Cc: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Hamza Mahfooz <hamza.mahfooz@....com>
I think this is fine, especially since it will help catch issues in
amdgpu quickly and hopefully encourage developers to fix their problems
before they make it to a tree with wider impact lika -next.
However, this is now the third place that W=1 has been effectively
enabled (i915 and btrfs are the other two I know of) and it would be
nice if this was a little more unified, especially since it is not
uncommon for the warnings under W=1 to shift around and keeping them
unified will make maintainence over the longer term a little easier. I
am not sure if this has been brought up in the past and I don't want to
hold up this change but I suspect this sentiment of wanting to enable
W=1 on a per-subsystem basis is going to continue to grow.
Regardless, for clang 11.1.0 to 16.0.5, I see no warnings when building
drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/ with Arch Linux's configuration or
allmodconfig.
Reviewed-by: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
Tested-by: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/Makefile | 13 ++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/Makefile b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/Makefile
> index 86b833085f19..8d16f280b695 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/Makefile
> @@ -40,7 +40,18 @@ ccflags-y := -I$(FULL_AMD_PATH)/include/asic_reg \
> -I$(FULL_AMD_PATH)/amdkfd
>
> subdir-ccflags-y := -Wextra
> -subdir-ccflags-y += $(call cc-option, -Wunused-but-set-variable)
> +subdir-ccflags-y += -Wunused
> +subdir-ccflags-y += -Wmissing-prototypes
> +subdir-ccflags-y += -Wmissing-declarations
> +subdir-ccflags-y += -Wmissing-include-dirs
> +subdir-ccflags-y += -Wold-style-definition
> +subdir-ccflags-y += -Wmissing-format-attribute
> +# Need this to avoid recursive variable evaluation issues
> +cond-flags := $(call cc-option, -Wunused-but-set-variable) \
> + $(call cc-option, -Wunused-const-variable) \
> + $(call cc-option, -Wstringop-truncation) \
> + $(call cc-option, -Wpacked-not-aligned)
> +subdir-ccflags-y += $(cond-flags)
> subdir-ccflags-y += -Wno-unused-parameter
> subdir-ccflags-y += -Wno-type-limits
> subdir-ccflags-y += -Wno-sign-compare
> --
> 2.40.1
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists