From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 759691F66F for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 18:55:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726481AbgKBSzY (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Nov 2020 13:55:24 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:54642 "EHLO pb-smtp2.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725797AbgKBSzV (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Nov 2020 13:55:21 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF2288DB53; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 13:55:19 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; s=sasl; bh=yiWvaF+n8EsYrOEp3Rq6YNWeHd4=; b=LdPK36EvLY9a4IbgqO2Y iLa4ozdp4kz0vmZoHmLmcUBmHpSkqApC6CLM7KxvucMvl5zEO7EfwBUr27t+ErH/ p2T6ab9343Esvpa4p8Et1iYyBgkopdY+x3cIFaATyR/U9m/AWMTV+l1ni4yRqaTg rugS6Y5W4yd/SNPXw4M0eOo= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=rEHKzGY5m6KKaMBQB9SkT9fPcMHl5/r38HsFTMHLqVev13 O+WJAJY0DtNCHIlgERb3MTLmwNe0Pb7VM6lvawrCCY8cPBQgTLXHH6jA+mfrMviF whwTJj7HCnYUYB7XVzDpWjC8QExg4M4W5bO9YGMFqTHx2I5Ra1wuiBX5nUDTY= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BE928DB52; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 13:55:19 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.119.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1A10E8DB51; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 13:55:19 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Ramsay Jones Cc: GIT Mailing-list Subject: Re: [PATCH] Makefile: enable -Wsparse-error for DEVELOPER build References: <6676a08d-0c25-14ba-4ea6-677bc7ab0e20@ramsayjones.plus.com> Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2020 10:55:18 -0800 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: F3D92BCA-1D3C-11EB-AFE2-74DE23BA3BAF-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Ramsay Jones writes: > Yes, anybody who just does 'make sparse' will notice the failure, so > that would be a definite improvement. (How many people run 'make sparse' > though?). At least, I was planning to add one to the number when I wrote the patch, so that I would start using it as part of daily integration build before pushing day's result out. I can tweak my $(MAKE) command line arguments in the script I use for daily integration builds, so the patch is not strictly needed for me personally. > I guess it would be most useful on a CI build, but I don't know what > would be involved in setting that up. CI builds already have enough stuff around invocation of "make test" etc., and it would be trivial to pass SPARSE_FLAGS from the command line when adding "make sparse" invocation to one of the scripts in ci/ directory, so from that point of view, this patch is not needed for them, either. My hope was that it would make it harder for individual contributors who run "make sparse" and fail to notice an error from it.