From: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
To: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Wentao Zhang <wentaoz5@illinois.edu>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@gmail.com>,
Bill Wendling <morbo@google.com>, Chuck Wolber <chuck@wolber.net>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
Justin Stitt <justinstitt@google.com>,
kasan-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org,
llvm@lists.linux.dev, Marco Elver <elver@google.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
Nicolas Schier <nsc@kernel.org>,
Peter Oberparleiter <oberpar@linux.ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 16/20] coverage: add MC/DC measurement
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2026 16:39:17 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261028203918.2355157-1-sashal@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261028191432.GA669102@ax162>
On Wed, Oct 28, 2026 at 12:14:32PM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
>On Wed, Oct 28, 2026 at 07:59:40AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> Larger decisions, and decisions the compiler can't instrument, produce
>> warnings. Starting with Clang 22 they are kept from becoming errors
>> with CONFIG_WERROR; older versions can't be used together with it.
>
>What is the reason for keeping these warnings in the build as opposed to
>just disabling them altogether? Are developers expected to address them
>and if so, how? It seems odd to keep them in the build but prevent them
>from breaking the build unless they are not intended to be acted on, in
>which case they should just be disabled outright.
They're not meant to be acted on. Clang only put them in a warning group
(-Wpgo-coverage) in 22, so before that there was no way to turn them
off, which is why I just left them on. I'll disable them in v2 where
Clang allows it.
--
Thanks,
Sasha
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-28 20:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-28 11:59 [RFC PATCH 00/20] Unify code coverage and add Clang source-based coverage with MC/DC Sasha Levin
2026-10-28 11:59 ` [RFC PATCH 01/20] coverage: move gcov and kcov under kernel/coverage/ Sasha Levin
2026-10-28 11:59 ` [RFC PATCH 02/20] kbuild: unify static coverage instrumentation as COVERAGE_PROFILE Sasha Levin
2026-10-28 11:59 ` [RFC PATCH 03/20] coverage: add a common debugfs interface Sasha Levin
2026-10-28 11:59 ` [RFC PATCH 04/20] compiler_types.h: Don't instrument __always_inline functions for coverage Sasha Levin
2026-10-28 13:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-28 14:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-28 16:45 ` Sasha Levin
2026-10-28 11:59 ` [RFC PATCH 05/20] context_tracking: Always inline the empty stubs called from noinstr code Sasha Levin
2026-10-28 13:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-28 11:59 ` [RFC PATCH 06/20] lockdep: " Sasha Levin
2026-10-28 11:59 ` [RFC PATCH 07/20] perf: Always inline the empty perf_lopwr_cb() stub Sasha Levin
2026-10-28 11:59 ` [RFC PATCH 08/20] rseq: Always inline the empty rseq_note_user_irq_entry() stub Sasha Levin
2026-10-28 11:59 ` [RFC PATCH 09/20] x86: Always inline empty stubs called from noinstr code Sasha Levin
2026-10-28 11:59 ` [RFC PATCH 10/20] x86/sev: Use non-instrumented bitops in the GHCB accessors Sasha Levin
2026-10-28 11:59 ` [RFC PATCH 11/20] objtool: Detect code coverage instrumentation in noinstr code Sasha Levin
2026-10-28 14:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-10-28 16:45 ` Sasha Levin
2026-10-28 11:59 ` [RFC PATCH 12/20] x86/sev: Stop excluding noinstr.o from code coverage Sasha Levin
2026-10-28 11:59 ` [RFC PATCH 13/20] x86/entry: Stop excluding the entry code from KCOV Sasha Levin
2026-10-28 11:59 ` [RFC PATCH 14/20] coverage: add Clang's source-based code coverage Sasha Levin
2026-10-28 11:59 ` [RFC PATCH 15/20] x86: Enable " Sasha Levin
2026-10-28 11:59 ` [RFC PATCH 16/20] coverage: add MC/DC measurement Sasha Levin
2026-10-28 19:14 ` Nathan Chancellor
2026-10-28 20:39 ` Sasha Levin [this message]
2026-10-28 11:59 ` [RFC PATCH 17/20] gcov: fix gcov_info_add() merge semantics for IOR counters Sasha Levin
2026-10-28 11:59 ` [RFC PATCH 18/20] kconfig: add CC_HAS_CONDITION_COVERAGE for MC/DC support detection Sasha Levin
2026-10-28 11:59 ` [RFC PATCH 19/20] gcov: add MC/DC condition coverage support Sasha Levin
2026-10-28 11:59 ` [RFC PATCH 20/20] Documentation: dev-tools: document the common code coverage interface Sasha Levin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20261028203918.2355157-1-sashal@kernel.org \
--to=sashal@kernel.org \
--cc=andreyknvl@gmail.com \
--cc=chuck@wolber.net \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=elver@google.com \
--cc=glider@google.com \
--cc=justinstitt@google.com \
--cc=kasan-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=morbo@google.com \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=nsc@kernel.org \
--cc=oberpar@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@kernel.org \
--cc=wentaoz5@illinois.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®