Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-180479-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAPM=9tw-53PCvveRcdLUUQ+mjq2X2er5zp6n1KeE8Nu8x=VP2g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=whxT8D_0j=bjtrvj-O=VEOjn6GW8GK4j2V+BiDUntZKAQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPM=9tyOtH24Mw_2X+bgV9iChOQV3LtmRCoR5x6KXhSUD6FjUg@mail.gmail.com> <CAHk-=wh8DWSMrtuhZOzanfBCFcuJCihO9x7fkzx-dBhLddXF-Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wh8DWSMrtuhZOzanfBCFcuJCihO9x7fkzx-dBhLddXF-Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dave Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 May 2024 09:17:42 +1000
Message-ID: <CAPM=9twCVkx9OqndCcvjjgx+P7ixBRwttiz25-R=bkycEo5vrQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [git pull] drm for 6.10-rc1
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>, 
	Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>, 
	dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

On Thu, 16 May 2024 at 08:56, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 15 May 2024 at 15:45, Dave Airlie <airlied@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >           The drm subsystem enables more warnings than the kernel default, so
> >           this config option is disabled by default.
>
> Irrelevant.
>
> If the *main* CONFIG_WERROR is on, then it does NOT MATTER if somebody
> sets CONFIG_DRM_WERROR or not. It's a no-op. It's pointless.
>
> And that means that it's also entirely pointless to ask. It's only annoying.
>
> > depends on DRM && EXPERT
> >
> > so we aren't throwing it at random users.
>
> Yes you are.
>
> Because - rightly or wrongly - distros enable EXPERT by default. At
> least Fedora does. So any user that starts from a distro config will
> have EXPERT enabled.
>
> > should we rename it CONFIG_DRM_WERROR_MORE or something?
>
> Renaming does nothing. If it's pointless, it's pointless even if it's renamed.
>
> It needs to have a
>
>    depends on !WERROR
>
> because if WERROR is already true, then it's stupid and wrong to ask AGAIN.
>
> To summarize: if the main WERROR is enabled, then the DRM tree is
> *ALREADY* built with WERROR. Asking for DRM_WERROR is wrong.
>
> I keep harping on bad config variables because our kernel config thing
> is already much too messy and is by far the most difficult part of
> building your own kernel.
>
> Everything else is literally just "make" followed by "make
> modules_install" and "make install". Very straightforward.
>
> But doing a kernel config? Nasty. And made nastier by bad and
> nonsensical questions.

It's also possible it's just that hey there's a few others in the tree

KVM_WERROR not tied to it
PPC_WERROR (why does CXL uses this?)
AMDGPU, I915 and XE all have !COMPILE_TEST on their variants

We should probably add !WERROR to all of these at this point.

Adding Jani who was the initial author of

commit f89632a9e5fa6c4787c14458cd42a9ef42025434
Author: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Date:   Tue Mar 5 11:07:36 2024 +0200

    drm: Add CONFIG_DRM_WERROR

where I see we actually removed the !COMPILE_TEST check in v2.

Dave.