Hi, On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 9:27 PM, Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 12:00:47PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote: >> > +EXTRA_CFLAGS += -Wextra -Wno-unused >> >> Why add -Wno-unused ? >> >> If it's because of verbosity, maybe > > Nah, it's because it is too noisy and spits too many false positives. > "too noisy" is a subjective point of view. > For example, it reports the arguments of all those stubs from the > headers which are provided for the else-branch of a CONFIG_* option, > etc. > and by the same way, you silence function marked with `warn_unused_result', unless I misread the manpage. If you want to silence something specific, why not just the `no' variant of the thing you do not want ? Btw, could you not take the same approach as the one taken by the BSD, which is 3 or 4 different level of new warnings. That way, you keep the noisy stuff for the highest warning level. - Arnaud > -- > Regards/Gruss, > Boris. > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
