On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 11:19 AM Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > So this clearly never even got a _whiff_ of build-testing.
>
> Oh come on.
Seriously - if you don't even _look_ at the warnings the build
generates, then it hasn't been build-tested.
I don't want to hear "Oh come on". I'm 100% serious.
Build-testing is not just "building". It's the "testing" of the build
too. You clearly never did _any_ testing of the build, since the build
had huge warnings.
Without the checking of the result, "build-testing" is just
"building", and completely irrelevant.
If you have problems seeing the warnings, add a "-Werror" to your scripts.
I do not want to see a _single_ warning in the kernel build. Yes, we
have one in the samples code, and even that annoys the hell out of me.
And exactly because we don't have any warnings in the default build,
it should be really really easy to check for new ones - it's not like
you have to wade through pages of warnings to see if any of them are
your new ones.
So no "Oh come on". You did *zero* testing of this crap, and you need
to own that fact instead of making excuses about it.
Linus
