From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263475AbUFJXnH (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Jun 2004 19:43:07 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263457AbUFJXnH (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Jun 2004 19:43:07 -0400 Received: from fire.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:14469 "EHLO fire-2.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263551AbUFJXme (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Jun 2004 19:42:34 -0400 Subject: Re: sparse in compile stats From: John Cherry To: Sam Ravnborg Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" In-Reply-To: <20040606191830.GB2788@mars.ravnborg.org> References: <20040606191830.GB2788@mars.ravnborg.org> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1086910938.5884.79.camel@cherrybomb.pdx.osdl.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.4 Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 16:42:18 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Sam, I am doing sparse runs now on all of linus' and andrew's kernels. Since sparse is changing along with the kernel, comparing to older versions will not buy us much right now. As sparse stabalizes, perhaps this would be an option. For the sparse runs, I am building with allmodconfig (bzImage and modules). John On Sun, 2004-06-06 at 12:18, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > Hi John. > > Recently Al Viro has put in a huge effort into sparse sanitize the kernel, > and likewise Linus has done several updates to sparse. > Net result is a _lot_ of sparse warnings removed, and very few (if any?) false positives. > > Do you think it is worth to include a sparse run when Linus does next -rc? > Comparing with older versions should only be for amusement, since Al and Linus did > such a big effor the last weeks. > > Sam