On Thu, 11 Feb 2021, Stephen Boyd wrote: > Quoting Lee Jones (2021-02-11 13:10:54) > > On Thu, 11 Feb 2021, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > > > > Quoting Lee Jones (2021-01-26 04:45:19) > > > > 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. > > > > > > > > This is the last set. Clock is clean after this. > > > > > > Is it possible to slam in some patch that makes W=1 the default for the > > > clk directory? I'm trying to avoid seeing this patch series again. > > > > One of my main goals of this project is that everyone (contributors, > > maintainers auto-builder robots etc) will be enabling W=1 builds > > *locally*. > > > > This isn't something you'll want to do at a global (i.e. in Mainline) > > level. That's kinda the point of W=1. > > > > Agreed, but is it possible to pass W=1 in the drivers/clk/Makefile? That would circumvent the point of W=1. Level-1 warnings are deemed, and I'm paraphrasing/making this up "not worth rejecting pull-requests over". In contrast, if Linus catches any W=0 warnings at pull-time, he will reject the pull-request as 'untested'. W=1 is defiantly something you'll want to enable locally though, and subsequently push back on contributors submitting code adding new ones. -- Lee Jones [李琼斯] Senior Technical Lead - Developer Services Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
