From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC3BCC38A2A for ; Fri, 8 May 2020 16:26:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A51C9208CA for ; Fri, 8 May 2020 16:26:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="jTat2N4z" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727829AbgEHQ0K (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 May 2020 12:26:10 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:37974 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726756AbgEHQ0K (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 May 2020 12:26:10 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [IPv6:2607:7c80:54:e::133]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 799DDC061A0C for ; Fri, 8 May 2020 09:26:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version :References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=eOXwZu6jGxF28/fjq4ri8nUXwqrvhi607Z+SSxjQJFs=; b=jTat2N4zBBs5R8ZNjqJ51Jzk+n nUw7KQs7wHetj7+78AD7fXlyEz4PMoGdSXlr5HuXa24GFMesWyaagH5Wo62q8Xt149nMuCUKGDlL4 wof7+yDNbtqMhHouGy72z4b8UolWUz+2bC+PijY65DGHkZlFZDvSvhVN9N1g0eaWIbBG2Qj4v03uh 2AqjxUHCiEZrkuzLwTCjH0atYIru9OoC4AzES6xussgr2ysgiNEaachVqeGj6jwcYU1W1NjmzD6ye kk8nSOYH+ZCmw5NefnQZT6wySXX0P841OdxN6WYWCALTY9Z8XjBtA24VFCydapD9JVhsu/xT7PmH3 v18dOSIQ==; Received: from j217100.upc-j.chello.nl ([24.132.217.100] helo=noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtpsa (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jX5p9-0002tG-1v; Fri, 08 May 2020 16:26:07 +0000 Received: from hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net (hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net [192.168.1.225]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8EC9630018B; Fri, 8 May 2020 18:26:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: by hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6F0EB29C8A723; Fri, 8 May 2020 18:26:04 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 8 May 2020 18:26:04 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Josh Poimboeuf Cc: Arnd Bergmann , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: objtool warning breaks build for fs/dlm/lock.o Message-ID: <20200508162604.GE3344@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20200507232941.jccuywl56bppxfyp@treble> <20200508095509.GX5298@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20200508161750.bl5c7wh36gh6gcvp@treble> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200508161750.bl5c7wh36gh6gcvp@treble> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, May 08, 2020 at 11:17:50AM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > On Fri, May 08, 2020 at 11:55:09AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Fri, May 08, 2020 at 11:27:39AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > > > Right, makes sense. It would be nice though to have a way of intentionally > > > turning all objtool warnings into errors. I do my randconfig tests > > > with '-Werror' > > > at the moment in order to catch all new warnings, but this does not catch > > > objtool errors at the moment. For now, this is probably the right thing to do, > > > as there are a couple of warnings that I have no patches for, but at some point > > > I would prefer to trap immediately when a new warning pops up. > > > > Completely untested, and I'm 100% unsure of the Makefile change, but > > something like so, then? > > Mostly looks good, but it only errors out on fatal errors, right? For > -Werror (and what Arnd is asking about) should it also return error on > "warnings > 0"? Oh, good point. Extra knob or just: if (error && ret) return -1 ?