[PATCH (set 1) 00/20] Rid W=1 warnings from GPU
Lee Jones
lee at kernel.org
Thu Aug 24 12:08:59 UTC 2023
On Thu, 24 Aug 2023, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Aug 2023, Jani Nikula wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 24 Aug 2023, Lee Jones <lee at kernel.org> 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.
> >
> > The next question is, how do we keep it W=1 clean going forward?
>
> My plan was to fix them all, then move each warning to W=0.
Some history:
- Starting with v5.8-rc1: 18867
- 2020-07-01: 18089
- 2020-07-07: 17288
- 2020-07-17: 15762
- 2020-07-20: 15724
- 2020-07-23: 15116
- 2020-08-12: 15184
- 2020-10-19: 10909
- 2020-11-04: 9385
- 2021-01-04: 5478
- 2021-01-12 4749
- 2021-01-29 4911
- 2021-04-07 3594
- 2021-05-20 2938
- 2021-07-01 2587
- 2023-02-10 2587
- 2023-08-22 1650
> Arnd recently submitted a set doing just that for a bunch of them.
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230811140327.3754597-1-arnd@kernel.org/
>
> I like to think a bunch of this is built on top of my previous efforts.
>
> GPU is a particularly tricky though - the warnings seem to come in faster
> than I can squash them. Maybe the maintainers can find a way to test
> new patches on merge?
>
> > Most people don't use W=1 because it's too noisy, so it's a bit of a
> > catch-22.
> >
> > In i915, we enable a lot of W=1 warnings using subdir-ccflags-y in our
> > Makefile. For CI/developer use we also enable kernel-doc warnings by
> > default.
> >
> > Should we start enabling some of those warning flags in drm/Makefile to
> > to keep the entire subsystem warning free?
>
> That would we awesome! We'd just need buy-in.
--
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
More information about the amd-gfx
mailing list