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;
Date:   Mon, 13 Sep 2021 11:08:19 -0700
From:   Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        x86@kernel.org, Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>
Cc:     "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org,
        clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com, llvm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Harden clang against unknown flag options
Message-ID: <YT+Tk55IKG/PyYgr@archlinux-ax161>
References: <20210824022640.2170859-1-nathan@kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210824022640.2170859-1-nathan@kernel.org>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 07:26:38PM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> This series cleans up an issue that was noticed by the kernel test robot
> where flags that clang does not implement support for are
> unconditionally added to the command line, which causes all subsequent
> calls to cc-{disable-warning,option} to fail, meaning developers are
> flooded with unnecessary and pointless warnings.
> 
> I hope the patches in and of themselves are reasonable and
> non-controversial. This is based on Masahiro's kbuild tree as there was
> a fairly large refactor around where clang's flags were added so I
> figured it would be best to go there with an x86 ack since the first
> patch does not depend on anything in -tip.
> 
> Cheers,
> Nathan
> 
> Nathan Chancellor (2):
>   x86: Do not add -falign flags unconditionally for clang
>   kbuild: Add -Werror=ignored-optimization-argument to CLANG_FLAGS
> 
>  arch/x86/Makefile_32.cpu | 12 +++++++++---
>  scripts/Makefile.clang   |  4 ++++
>  2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> 
> base-commit: fb3fdea450305d932d933d7e75eead0477249d8e
> -- 
> 2.33.0
> 
> 

Hello x86 folks,

Would you guys be able to give me feedback on this series or accept it?
We are continuously getting false positive warning reports from i386 randconfigs.

https://lore.kernel.org/r/ece61908-f8eb-4c45-5d5f-bfc52f3b8f45@kernel.org/
https://lore.kernel.org/r/YT+RqrkQAOVhbkWu@archlinux-ax161/

Cheers,
Nathan