linux-kernel - Re: [git pull] drm for 6.10-rc1

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]

Message-ID: <CAHk-=whxT8D_0j=bjtrvj-O=VEOjn6GW8GK4j2V+BiDUntZKAQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 13:43:13 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...el.com>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>, dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>, 
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [git pull] drm for 6.10-rc1

On Tue, 14 May 2024 at 23:21, Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com> wrote:
>
> This is the main pull request for the drm subsystems for 6.10.

. and now that I look more at this pull request, I find other things wrong.

Why is the DRM code asking if I want to enable -Werror? I have Werror
enabled *already*.

I hate stupid config questions. They only confuse users.

If the global WERROR config is enabled, then the DRM config certainly
shouldn't ask whether you want even more -Werror. It does nothing but
annoy people.

And no, we are not going to have subsystems that can *weaken* the
existing CONFIG_WERROR. Happily, that doesn't seem to be what the DRM
code wants to do, it just wants to add -Werror, but as mentioned, its'
crazy to do that when we already have it globally enabled.

Now, it might make more sense to ask if you want -Wextra. A lot of
those warnings are bogus.

               Linus