On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 05:21:23PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 11:00:10AM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 09:49:38AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: > > > > config: hexagon-randconfig-r002-20220808 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20220809/202208090909.Pg0BZGie-lkp@xxxxxxxxx/config) > > > compiler: clang version 16.0.0 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project 5f1c7e2cc5a3c07cbc2412e851a7283c1841f520) > > > It doesn't look like these warnings were addressed before the change was > > applied to -next as commit 4e6bedd3c396 ("ASoC: codecs: add support for > > the TI SRC4392 codec"). I now see them in next-20220816. > > It's probably worth talking to the 0day people about prioritising what > they're reporting against, especially given that the reports have > evolved into a bit of an eye chart - this was reported against a Hexagon > randconfig with an unreleased compiler which is underselling it rather. Sure, that might be interesting to have certain architectures and in-tree configurations prioritized over others (like arm64/x86_64 + allmodconfig). At the same time, I would expect developers and maintainers to focus on the warning text first and foremost, not what architecture, configuration, or compiler is being used. This issue is very clearly not architecture or configuration specific, there is no #ifdef in this function that changes the nature of the warning. While it is compiler specific (because possible uninitialized variable warnings are disabled with GCC), it is not dependent on the version (although I guess that isn't apparent). I suppose I can just comment on future randconfig reports to point out how they will affect allmodconfig and such. Cheers, Nathan
