Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Message-ID: <1517569472.3118.257.camel@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: clang warning: implicit conversion in intel_ddi.c:1481
From:   Knut Omang <knut.omang@oracle.com>
To:     Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com>
Cc:     Ozan Alpay <ozyalpy@gmail.com>,
        Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
        Ville =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Syrj=E4l=E4?= 
        <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>, sil2review@lists.osadl.org,
        kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org, David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
        intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
        Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>,
        llvmlinux@lists.linuxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
Date:   Fri, 02 Feb 2018 12:04:32 +0100
In-Reply-To: <87h8qzisbt.fsf@intel.com>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1802011823340.4316@alpaca>
         <20180201180240.GA28042@kroah.com>
         <alpine.DEB.2.20.1802012045570.29994@hsp> <87372jkcu5.fsf@intel.com>
         <alpine.DEB.2.20.1802021054500.13838@hsp>
         <20180202100613.GA21492@kroah.com> <87h8qzisbt.fsf@intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 2018-02-02 at 12:44 +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> +Knut, Fengguang
> 
> On Fri, 02 Feb 2018, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > 	- If clang now builds the kernel "cleanly", yes, I want to take
> > 	  warning fixes in the stable tree.  And even better yet, if you
> > 	  keep working to ensure the tree is "clean", that would be
> > 	  wonderful.
> 
> So we can run sparse using 'make C=1' and friends, or other static
> analysis tools using 'make CHECK=foo C=1', as long as the passed command
> line params work. There was work by Knut to extend this make checker
> stuff [1]. Since mixing different HOSTCC's in a single workdir seems
> like a bad idea, I wonder how hard it would be to make clang work like
> this:
> 
> $ make CHECK=clang C=1
> 
> Or using Knut's wrapper. Feels like that could increase the use of clang
> for static analysis of patches.

Yes, definitely a natural addition to the set of tools supported by
runchecks to also support using alternate compiler(s) as "checkers" - I guess
the same would apply for people compiling with clang - that they don't accidentally
generate warnings with gcc..

Thanks,
Knut

> BR,
> Jani.
> 
> 
> [1] http://mid.mail-archive.com/cover.5b56d020b8e826a7da33b1823c059acd0c123f8b.151507278
> 2.git-series.knut.omang@oracle.com
> 
> 
>