Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1692492 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-07-20 09:30 +0200 |
| Last post | 2017-07-20 12:50 +0200 |
| Articles | 3 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: + kbuild-disable-wformat-truncation-warnings-by-default.patch added to -mm tree Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> - 2017-07-20 09:30 +0200
Re: + kbuild-disable-wformat-truncation-warnings-by-default.patch added to -mm tree gregkh <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> - 2017-07-20 10:20 +0200
Re: + kbuild-disable-wformat-truncation-warnings-by-default.patch added to -mm tree Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> - 2017-07-20 12:50 +0200
| From | Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-20 09:30 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: + kbuild-disable-wformat-truncation-warnings-by-default.patch added to -mm tree |
| Message-ID | <u5e4h-41p-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 11:50 PM, <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> ------------------------------------------------------
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> Subject: kbuild: disable -Wformat-truncation warnings by default
>
> With x86 allmodconfig, we currently get 233 -Wformat-truncation warnings,
> which makes the entire warnings rather useless.
>
> This turns off the warning by default, unless we specify W=1 or higher
>
> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170714120720.906842-2-arnd@arndb.de
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> ---
>
> scripts/Makefile.extrawarn | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff -puN scripts/Makefile.extrawarn~kbuild-disable-wformat-truncation-warnings-by-default scripts/Makefile.extrawarn
> --- a/scripts/Makefile.extrawarn~kbuild-disable-wformat-truncation-warnings-by-default
> +++ a/scripts/Makefile.extrawarn
> @@ -67,5 +67,8 @@ KBUILD_CFLAGS += $(call cc-disable-warni
> KBUILD_CFLAGS += $(call cc-disable-warning, sign-compare)
> KBUILD_CFLAGS += $(call cc-disable-warning, format-zero-length)
> KBUILD_CFLAGS += $(call cc-disable-warning, uninitialized)
> +else
> +# noisy gcc-7 warnings
> +KBUILD_CFLAGS += $(call cc-option,-Wformat-truncation=0)
> endif
> endif
Hi Andrew, Linus, Greg,
I noticed that Linus has made a similar patch in 4.13-rc1, commit bd664f6b3e37
("disable new gcc-7.1.1 warnings for now"), and it completely disables three
warnings (format-truncation, format-overflow and int-in-bool-context).
Obviously there is no point in having both, so let's talk about what we
want for 4.13, stable-backports and for future kernels, I'll then send those
patches. Here is my first suggestion:
- enable all three warnings with "make W=1" in 4.13, but leave them
disabled by default.
- backport Linus' patch, plus the follow-up for W=1 to stable kernels,
to allow stable kernels to build cleanly
- backport the patches that address any other gcc-7 warnings, as
well as those that are not obvious false-positives to stable kernels
- In 4.14+, use my version above and address all int-in-bool-context
and format-overflow warnings, but only use -Wformat-truncation
with make W=1.
Any other suggestions?
Arnd
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gregkh <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-20 10:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <u5eQG-4Bm-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1692492 |
On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 09:24:21AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 11:50 PM, <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > ------------------------------------------------------
> > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > Subject: kbuild: disable -Wformat-truncation warnings by default
> >
> > With x86 allmodconfig, we currently get 233 -Wformat-truncation warnings,
> > which makes the entire warnings rather useless.
> >
> > This turns off the warning by default, unless we specify W=1 or higher
> >
> > Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170714120720.906842-2-arnd@arndb.de
> > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> > ---
> >
> > scripts/Makefile.extrawarn | 3 +++
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff -puN scripts/Makefile.extrawarn~kbuild-disable-wformat-truncation-warnings-by-default scripts/Makefile.extrawarn
> > --- a/scripts/Makefile.extrawarn~kbuild-disable-wformat-truncation-warnings-by-default
> > +++ a/scripts/Makefile.extrawarn
> > @@ -67,5 +67,8 @@ KBUILD_CFLAGS += $(call cc-disable-warni
> > KBUILD_CFLAGS += $(call cc-disable-warning, sign-compare)
> > KBUILD_CFLAGS += $(call cc-disable-warning, format-zero-length)
> > KBUILD_CFLAGS += $(call cc-disable-warning, uninitialized)
> > +else
> > +# noisy gcc-7 warnings
> > +KBUILD_CFLAGS += $(call cc-option,-Wformat-truncation=0)
> > endif
> > endif
>
> Hi Andrew, Linus, Greg,
>
> I noticed that Linus has made a similar patch in 4.13-rc1, commit bd664f6b3e37
> ("disable new gcc-7.1.1 warnings for now"), and it completely disables three
> warnings (format-truncation, format-overflow and int-in-bool-context).
>
> Obviously there is no point in having both, so let's talk about what we
> want for 4.13, stable-backports and for future kernels, I'll then send those
> patches. Here is my first suggestion:
>
> - enable all three warnings with "make W=1" in 4.13, but leave them
> disabled by default.
> - backport Linus' patch, plus the follow-up for W=1 to stable kernels,
> to allow stable kernels to build cleanly
I don't care which of these, I'll take whatever is in Linus's tree.
And I'll go backport that patch now as I'm getting annoyed by the
warnings at the moment...
> - backport the patches that address any other gcc-7 warnings, as
> well as those that are not obvious false-positives to stable kernels
I'll do that as well, as I notice them go by.
> - In 4.14+, use my version above and address all int-in-bool-context
> and format-overflow warnings, but only use -Wformat-truncation
> with make W=1.
I don't really care about this, as long as we are not forced to do
"silly things" like some of the patches seemed to do :)
thanks,
greg k-h
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-20 12:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <u5hbP-67w-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1692544 |
On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 10:17 AM, gregkh <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 09:24:21AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 11:50 PM, <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>> > ------------------------------------------------------
>> > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>> > Subject: kbuild: disable -Wformat-truncation warnings by default
>> >
>> > With x86 allmodconfig, we currently get 233 -Wformat-truncation warnings,
>> > which makes the entire warnings rather useless.
>> >
>> > This turns off the warning by default, unless we specify W=1 or higher
>> >
>> > Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170714120720.906842-2-arnd@arndb.de
>> > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
>> > ---
>> >
>> > scripts/Makefile.extrawarn | 3 +++
>> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>> >
>> > diff -puN scripts/Makefile.extrawarn~kbuild-disable-wformat-truncation-warnings-by-default scripts/Makefile.extrawarn
>> > --- a/scripts/Makefile.extrawarn~kbuild-disable-wformat-truncation-warnings-by-default
>> > +++ a/scripts/Makefile.extrawarn
>> > @@ -67,5 +67,8 @@ KBUILD_CFLAGS += $(call cc-disable-warni
>> > KBUILD_CFLAGS += $(call cc-disable-warning, sign-compare)
>> > KBUILD_CFLAGS += $(call cc-disable-warning, format-zero-length)
>> > KBUILD_CFLAGS += $(call cc-disable-warning, uninitialized)
>> > +else
>> > +# noisy gcc-7 warnings
>> > +KBUILD_CFLAGS += $(call cc-option,-Wformat-truncation=0)
>> > endif
>> > endif
>>
>> Hi Andrew, Linus, Greg,
>>
>> I noticed that Linus has made a similar patch in 4.13-rc1, commit bd664f6b3e37
>> ("disable new gcc-7.1.1 warnings for now"), and it completely disables three
>> warnings (format-truncation, format-overflow and int-in-bool-context).
>>
>> Obviously there is no point in having both, so let's talk about what we
>> want for 4.13, stable-backports and for future kernels, I'll then send those
>> patches. Here is my first suggestion:
>>
>> - enable all three warnings with "make W=1" in 4.13, but leave them
>> disabled by default.
>> - backport Linus' patch, plus the follow-up for W=1 to stable kernels,
>> to allow stable kernels to build cleanly
>
> I don't care which of these, I'll take whatever is in Linus's tree.
>
> And I'll go backport that patch now as I'm getting annoyed by the
> warnings at the moment...
Yes, that's what I meant here, the follow-up obviously has to
be agreed on before that can be backported. Let me know what other
warnings you see on the stable kernels after backporting the
bd664f6b3e37 patch, I can help identify the fixes that went into
mainline to address those if you want.
>> - backport the patches that address any other gcc-7 warnings, as
>> well as those that are not obvious false-positives to stable kernels
>
> I'll do that as well, as I notice them go by.
>
>> - In 4.14+, use my version above and address all int-in-bool-context
>> and format-overflow warnings, but only use -Wformat-truncation
>> with make W=1.
>
> I don't really care about this, as long as we are not forced to do
> "silly things" like some of the patches seemed to do :)
Sure, I understand that from the previous feedback, and for a couple
of patches I found better workarounds (that improve the code
while fixing the warning, rather than adding hacks). I also
reported two of them in gcc bugzilla already, one was decided
to be invalid:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81484
the other one looks valid, but possibly hard to fix:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81483
When I go through the remaining patches again, I'll have a
look at what others might be incorrect warnings that should
be fixed in gcc, or which ones can be fixed in a better way.
I just wanted to first make sure that there is no fundamental
objections to enabling the warnings in future kernels (at
whichever W= level) at all.
Arnd
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web