Hi Alan, On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 15:47:49 +0000 Alan Cox <a...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote: > > And yes btw we should turn this option on in -next, and get these sort of > things out of the tree for good. More importantly it'll mean anyone > adding another one gets a whine on the spot.
While I appreciate your confidence, I don't notice quite a few new warnings (because there are so many of them already :-(). Is there some reason to not turn this on in our "normal" builds? Does it produce many false positives? What compiler version is required? I also currently don't carry patches that only ever appear in linux-next (well, not intentionally anyway). I assume it would require a patch to the Makefile(s) to turn this on. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell s...@canb.auug.org.au
pgpsX5aFB3Gtv.pgp
Description: PGP signature
