Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Sender: Guenter Roeck <groeck7@gmail.com>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20210906142615.GA1917503@roeck-us.net>
 <CAHk-=wgjTePY1v_D-jszz4NrpTso0CdvB9PcdroPS=TNU1oZMQ@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Enable '-Werror' by default for all kernel builds
Message-ID: <c3790fb9-b83f-9596-18a1-21ace987c850@roeck-us.net>
Date:   Mon, 6 Sep 2021 10:05:58 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.11.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wgjTePY1v_D-jszz4NrpTso0CdvB9PcdroPS=TNU1oZMQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 9/6/21 9:12 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 6, 2021 at 7:26 AM Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> wrote:
>>
>> Build results:
>>          total: 153 pass: 89 fail: 64
> 
> Well, that sadly proves the point of that patch. x86-64 may be clean,
> because I have required it manually. Others not necessarily so much..
> 
> I've got at least one sparc64 fix in my inbox. It _might_ fix some
> other cases too (syscall checking), but I suspect it's one of those
> "death by a thousand cuts" situations, not just one or two issues that
> show up.
> 
> Do you end up exposing the errors anywhere where I can take a look?
> 

Logs are available from KernelCI.
See https://linux.kernelci.org/job/mainline/
I expect that 0-day will also have a field day.

> If some of them are just because of bad tooling on certain
> architectures (ie fundamentally "this is unfixable, because we use
> gcc-XYZ that just always causes warnings") then those we could/should
> just disable -Werror for those and forget about them.
> 
> But hopefully most cases are just "people haven't cared enough" and
> easily fixed.
> 

We'll see. For my testbed I disabled the new configuration flag
for the time being because its primary focus is boot tests, and
there won't be any boot tests if images fail to build.

Guenter