On Tue, Mar 05, 2024 at 10:52:54PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Tue, Mar 5, 2024, at 20:30, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
On Tue, Mar 05, 2024 at 10:52:16AM -0800, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 10:50 AM Arnd Bergmann arnd@arndb.de wrote:
On Tue, Mar 5, 2024, at 18:42, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
As the warnings do not appear to have a high signal to noise ratio and the source level silencing options are not sustainable, disable the warnings unconditionally, as they will be enabled with -Wenum-conversion and are supported in all versions of clang that can build the kernel.
I took a look at a sample of warnings in an allmodconfig build and found a number that need attention. I would much prefer to leave these turned on at the W=1 level and only disable them at the default warning level.
Sounds like these new diagnostics are very noisy. 0day bot sends people reports at W=1. Perhaps W=2?
It feels like this is not a great reason for moving it to W=2 instead of W=1, but W=2 is still better than always disabling it I think.
Specifically, the 0day bot warns for newly added W=1 warnings but not for preexisting ones, and I think there are other warnings at the W=1 level that are similarly noisy to this one.
A number of subsystems test with W=1 as well and while opting into W=1 means that you are potentially asking for new warnings across newer compiler releases, a warning with this number of instances is going to cause a lot of issues (I think of netdev for example).
I only see a handful of warnings in net (devlink, bpf) and drivers/net (ethernet/{3com,amd8111e,funeth,hns,idpf,jme,mlx4} and wireless/{iwlwifi,mt76,rtw88,rtw89}).
These are also some of the ones that I think need a closer look.
Fair enough, I have sent v2 that just moves these warnings to W=1.
Cheers, Nathan