Am 25.01.2017 um 09:21 schrieb Jani Nikula <jani.nik...@intel.com>:
> Yes, see below. It's simplistic and it has an external dependency, but
> it got the job done. And it does not depend on Sphinx; it's just a
> kernel-doc and rst lint, not Sphinx lint. Whether that's a good or a bad
> thing is debatable.
>
> Anyway, I do think the approach of making 'make CHECK=the-tool C=1' work
> is what we should aim at.
Ah, cool ... didn't know C=1 before .. I will consider it in v2.
> Markus' patch could probably be made to do
> that by accepting the same arguments that are passed to compilers.
Is this what you mean?
make W=n [targets] Enable extra gcc checks, n=1,2,3 where
1: warnings which may be relevant and do not occur too often
2: warnings which occur quite often but may still be relevant
3: more obscure warnings, can most likely be ignored
Multiple levels can be combined with W=12 or W=123
Thanks!
--Markus--
