On Fri, Apr 05, 2019 at 09:39:26AM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > Hm, I would actually argue the reverse. Warnings are generally bad and > -Werror is useful for ensuring that we don't have any. For warnings > that don't provide value, we just disable those individual warnings. Sure, during development it's an excellent idea to investigate compiler warnings, and -Werror can be useful for that. But the Linux kernel is built by countless users in wildly varying environments, and it's almost a given that someone will use a compiler that'll complain about a valid part of your code whose style it considers bad. As an example, the warning that's breaking the build for me is -Wundef complaining about several "#if UNDEFINED_IDENTIFIER" constructs in the libelf headers. (I agree with gcc in considering this bad style, but it's perfectly valid C, and there probably wasn't a warning about it back when this header was written.) Regards, Luis
