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;
Date:   Wed, 12 Feb 2020 11:53:14 -0800
From:   Oliver Upton <oupton@google.com>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        KVM list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] KVM changes for Linux 5.6-rc2
Message-ID: <20200212195314.GA27069@google.com>
References: <20200212164714.7733-1-pbonzini@redhat.com>
 <CAHk-=wh6KEgPz_7TFqSgg3T29SrCBU+h64t=BWyCKwJOrk3RLQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <b90a886e-b320-43d3-b2b6-7032aac57abe@redhat.com>
 <CAHk-=wh8eYt9b8SrP0+L=obHWKU0=vXj8BxBNZ3DYd=6wZTKqw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wh8eYt9b8SrP0+L=obHWKU0=vXj8BxBNZ3DYd=6wZTKqw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 11:38:20AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 11:19 AM Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > > So this clearly never even got a _whiff_ of build-testing.
> >
> > Oh come on.
> 
> Seriously - if you don't even _look_ at the warnings the build
> generates, then it hasn't been build-tested.
> 
> I don't want to hear "Oh come on". I'm 100% serious.
> 
> Build-testing is not just "building". It's the "testing" of the build
> too. You clearly never did _any_ testing of the build, since the build
> had huge warnings.
> 
> Without the checking of the result, "build-testing" is just
> "building", and completely irrelevant.
> 
> If you have problems seeing the warnings, add a "-Werror" to your scripts.
> 
> I do not want to see a _single_ warning in the kernel build. Yes, we
> have one in the samples code, and even that annoys the hell out of me.
> 
> And exactly because we don't have any warnings in the default build,
> it should be really really easy to check for new ones - it's not like
> you have to wade through pages of warnings to see if any of them are
> your new ones.
> 
> So no "Oh come on". You did *zero* testing of this crap, and you need
> to own that fact instead of making excuses about it.
> 
>                    Linus

I should've caught this before even a build test, let alone sending it
out. My apologies for such an obvious + crap mistake.

--
Oliver