[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 1/2] MIPS: Kbuild: remove -Werror

To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] MIPS: Kbuild: remove -Werror
From: Jonas Gorski <>
Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 14:08:16 +0200
Cc: Artem Bityutskiy <>, David Daney <>, Ralf Baechle <>, MIPS Mailing List <>, MTD Maling List <>
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ytdRRn7pEuKBGQzNJZ319PZvoLwhT8DZVb1hT8DWvKs=; b=Rw1L87avCdV9FS4rpNKqKxY9zrYkPYyIUYzGhMM1cYeptUrcMbkJNqmqbOlDF0pmfQ LkFuw6XU5L+cHk/J2u0zFAbZvvbU6iExDsXZM/dqWk57nnnLxNkhLOE3gIXFDAMSqyBp x018QGKEq7I43+a0OmWIyrUVanwSpENg1cBlyltev8atTR7vlROZoLEfcwKYBWpCUH7H EbHE5pKqAsjsqT7Ww8QM4y1czgBnX6Rhfi/OLNchxQsTcKUD6Qhb35QPAy4a3qDxt42V EW2cBwIeaoWgxLyw/p32HUFVlu3Un5T+ELj8hziarQut5s48MqWGrWckusaKpPcBpHik MR5g==
In-reply-to: <>
References: <> <> <> <1336289676.1996.3.camel@koala> <> <1336293478.2801.4.camel@brekeke> <>
On 6 May 2012 11:14, Maciej W. Rozycki <> wrote:
> On Sun, 6 May 2012, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
>> >  And my opinion is based on experience.  Please check the LMO archives for
>> > why Ralf added this option in the first place -- many years ago.  It's
>> > probably recorded in the git repository too (I'm not sure if the option
>> > was added before or after we moved away from CVS, but in any case old
>> > change logs have been imported when our current repo was created).
>> We need to figure out how to make -Werror be applied only when we do not
>> have W=[123].
>  Hmm, that sounds better, however has the counter-intuitive side-effect of
> lowering the severity of the warnings that are enabled even without
> W=[123].
>  Modern versions of GCC have that selective -Wno-error=foo option and I
> think it should be possible to build the precise list of warnings not to
> choke on locally in arch/mips/Kbuild with little Makefile magic, falling
> back to something sane for older GCC versions (I'm not sure exactly when
> these selective options were added, certainly sometime between 4.1 and
> 4.3).
>  This will be a bit imperfect if any of these additional -Wfoo options
> duplicate ones already added to KBUILD_CFLAGS in our top-level Makefile
> (either explicitly or via -Wall), but that's about the best we can do.
> I'll see if I can cook up something quickly.

Hm, how about doing it the other way round, i.e. explicitly enable
which warnings we want to treat as errors with -Werror=foo? That way
we don't lower the severity when W=[123] and new default enabled
warnings in gcc can't break the build any more, just better (or worse
;-) heuristics can.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>