Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932164AbWJASpe (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Oct 2006 14:45:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932176AbWJASpe (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Oct 2006 14:45:34 -0400 Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:44689 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932164AbWJASpd (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Oct 2006 14:45:33 -0400 Message-ID: <45200CC8.2030404@garzik.org> Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2006 14:45:28 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (X11/20060913) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Walker CC: Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Subject: Re: Announce: gcc bogus warning repository References: <451FC657.6090603@garzik.org> <1159717214.24767.3.camel@c-67-180-230-165.hsd1.ca.comcast.net> <20061001111226.3e14133f.akpm@osdl.org> <452005E7.5030705@garzik.org> <1159727188.24767.9.camel@c-67-180-230-165.hsd1.ca.comcast.net> In-Reply-To: <1159727188.24767.9.camel@c-67-180-230-165.hsd1.ca.comcast.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -4.3 (----) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 3.1.3 on srv5.dvmed.net summary: Content analysis details: (-4.3 points, 5.0 required) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1449 Lines: 34 Daniel Walker wrote: > On Sun, 2006-10-01 at 14:16 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: >> Andrew Morton wrote: >>> The downsides are that it muckies up the source a little and introduces a >>> very small risk that real use-uninitialised bugs will be hidden. But I >>> believe the benefit outweighs those disadvantages. >> How about just marking the ones I've already done in #gccbug? >> >> If I'm taking the time to audit the code, and separate out bogosities >> from real bugs, it would be nice not to see that effort wasted. > > There was a long thread on this, it's not about anyone not reviewing the > code properly when the warning is first silenced. It's that future > changes might create new problems that are also silenced. I don't think > it's a huge concern, especially since there's was a config option to > turn the warning backs on. That doesn't address my question at all. If there is no difference between real non-init bugs and bogus warnings, then a config option doesn't make any difference at all, does it? Real bugs are still hidden either way: if the warnings are turned on, the bugs are lost in the noise. if the warnings are turned off, the bugs are completely hidden. Jeff - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/