Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 09:41:00 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield@windriver.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf: fix gcc4.6 build failure with unused-but-set
 warning
Message-ID: <20110603074100.GA16694@elte.hu>
References: <8a0acb368eef010fd2eb2e889e2c62d91bd8a918.1307047668.git.dvhart@linux.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <8a0acb368eef010fd2eb2e889e2c62d91bd8a918.1307047668.git.dvhart@linux.intel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-17)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1289
Lines: 33


* Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com> wrote:

> This patch creates a new perf/Makefile variable, LESS_WARNINGS and 
> adds -Wno-unused-but-set-variable. The new variable helps 
> distinguish between the added warnings in EXTRA_WARNINGS versus 
> those we want to remove, including the existing -Wno-system-headers 
> which I moved to LESS_WARNINGS.

Btw., while you resolved the issue, it would nevertheless nice to 
introduce a 'make WERROR=0' build method that removes -Werror.

Would you be interested in sending a patch for that?

There would be several advantages of such a patch:

 - GCC often introduces new warnings with lots of false positives - 
   breaking -Werror builds. WERROR=0 would allow one to build perf 
   without much fuss - while people would still send patches to avoid 
   the fuss of having to type WERROR=0 :-)

 - bisecting back to commits that produce a (mostly harmless) warning 
   on some compiler is more difficult. With WERROR=0 one could bisect 
   without worrying about harmless warnings.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/