Date:   Sun, 9 Jan 2022 14:10:24 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To:     Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.dentz@gmail.com>
Cc:     "An, Tedd" <tedd.an@intel.com>, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
        "linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org" <linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:NETWORKING [GENERAL]" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: pull request: bluetooth 2022-01-07
Message-ID: <20220109141024.719698d2@kicinski-fedora-PC1C0HJN.hsd1.ca.comcast.net>
In-Reply-To: <CABBYNZJEZFwoQyAhXwpQsRB4c4jks4Yg9Sw9XLwPL7Pk3j_iMA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20220107210942.3750887-1-luiz.dentz@gmail.com>
        <20220107182712.7549a8eb@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
        <CABBYNZJEZFwoQyAhXwpQsRB4c4jks4Yg9Sw9XLwPL7Pk3j_iMA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 23:50:40 -0800 Luiz Augusto von Dentz wrote:
> > FWIW to see the new warnings check out net-next, do a allmodconfig build
> > with W=1 C=1, pull in your code, reset back to net-next (this will
> > "touch" all the files that need rebuilding), do a single threaded build
> > and save (2>file) the warnings, pull in your code, do another build  
> > (2>file2), diff the warnings from the build of just net-next and after  
> > pull.  
> 
> Hmm, we might as well do that in our CI then, but isn't that gonna
> cause all sorts of warnings in different subsystem/drivers to appear?
> I get that the diff should come clean if we do this 2 stage builds
> like you suggested but I'm not sure that is the best approach for CI,
> what do you think @An, Tedd? I'd guess we could keep our minimal
> config to keep building times in check but add a 2 stage build per
> patch so we can detect if they produce new warnings.

FWIW if you use patchwork you can try to massage our scripts to do the
building: https://github.com/kuba-moo/nipa That said our setup is far
from perfect as well.