On 18/03/2026 13:12, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > On Wed, Mar 18, 2026 at 01:03:03PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 18/03/2026 12:58, Segher Boessenkool wrote: >>> On Wed, Mar 18, 2026 at 12:54:30PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> On 18/03/2026 12:51, Segher Boessenkool wrote: >>>>> On Tue, Mar 17, 2026 at 02:08:24PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>>>> Return value of ps3_start_probe_thread() is not used, so code can be >>>>>> simplified to fix W=1 clang warnings: >>>>>> >>>>>> arch/powerpc/platforms/ps3/device-init.c:953:6: error: variable >>>>>> 'result' set but not used [-Werror,-Wunused-but-set-variable] >>>>> >>>>> And this is exactly why -Werror is harmful. A boring harmless warning >>>>> turned into a build break :-( >>>> >>>> -Werror does not matter here. We do not want warnings either, assuming >>>> of course they are correct. >>>> >>>> So if this warning is correct, then patch should be applied and WERROR >>>> is irrelevant. >>> >>> The build is broken. -Werror is positively harmful. >>> >>> Yes, you want the warnings fixed, but maybe something else has priority >>> right now? >> >> What do you mean? This is waiting on the list for long time - note that >> it is a resend - so if warning is correct, for how long it should wait >> to get to the "priority" box? >> >> And why anything needs even the priority here? Why priority has to be >> discussed, especially for some legacy (I think?) code? Why correct >> patches cannot be simply applied after some time/review? > > It is totally simple: without -Werror, you can build a kernel. With it, > you cannot.
What are you discussing here? This is a patch, not WERROR talk. > > The ***warning*** is correct, there is something in the code that can be > improved. That is why such things are warnings: the compiler can > produce useful output, there is no reason to scream bloody murder. > > The main reason some people like -Werror is because they are too lazy to > look at the warning messages they get from normal builds. Such > developers need potty training, this is not a reason to punish all more > reasonable people! How is this relevant to this warning? Best regards, Krzysztof
