Hi Simon, On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 5:37 AM Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote: > > Hi Masahiro, > > On Sat, 9 May 2020 at 05:00, Masahiro Yamada <masahi...@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > On Sat, May 9, 2020 at 3:16 AM Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 09:16:40PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > > > > Hi Masahiro, > > > > > > > > On Thu, 7 May 2020 at 19:54, Masahiro Yamada <masahi...@kernel.org> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 10:39 AM Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Masahiro, > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 7 May 2020 at 06:21, Masahiro Yamada > > > > > > <yamada.masah...@socionext.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Add -Werror=implicit-function-declaration as Linux does. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you do not check the prototype, it may go wrong run-time. > > > > > > > It is better to break the build, and require to include correct > > > > > > > headers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masah...@socionext.com> > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Makefile | 2 +- > > > > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > NAK > > > > > > > > > > > > We already get a warning in this situation. This makes it painful > > > > > > for > > > > > > development since things that should be warnings end up being > > > > > > errors. > > > > > > So your build fails when really it should work well enough to do a > > > > > > test run with your new code. I don't think it has any benefit on > > > > > > code > > > > > > quality since we already detect warnings in gitlab, etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > U-Boot is set up so that warnings are reported and are easy to spot > > > > > > if > > > > > > you use 'make -s' (i.e. not buried in the output). > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Simon > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Linux added this flag in 2007. > > > > > > > > > > The intention seems to break the build earlier > > > > > when a non-existing function is used. > > > > > > > > > > I have not seen compliant about this flag in Linux. > > > > > What does it make different for U-Boot ? > > > > > > > > Well that commit message is quite misleading. The author is presumably > > > > ignoring the warnings that come out in the compile phase. For me they > > > > come up loud and clear. I don't know why it takes half an hour to get > > > > to the link stage. My average incremental build time is under 4 > > > > seconds including the link. > > > > > > > > Finally, the warning does not tell you anything about whether the > > > > function doesn't exist. It just tells you you have left out a header > > > > file. > > > > > > > > I know how much of a pain this is, because coreboot does this. It does > > > > it partly because there is so much build output that the warnings are > > > > invisible unless they actually halt the build. Even then you have to > > > > search for what went wrong. > > > > > > I'm not immediately sure of the right answer here. Part of the problem > > > is that even with 'make -s' U-Boot can be horribly noisy due to device > > > tree warnings. I assume Yamada-san ran in to a problem and was > > > expecting the build to have failed but instead was chasing down a > > > run-time debug until finding this. > > > > > > I did not run into a problem. > > > > When I was replacing <common.h> with some lighter headers, > > I missed some warnings ( but I noticed them after all). > > > > In Linux, if I miss to include a header, it fails to build. > > In U-Boot, it does not. > > > > Personally, I like to align with Linux policy, > > but if you are not comfortable with this patch, > > please feel free to ignore it. > > I really don't understand the point of warnings if we are just going > to turn them into errors. > > How about adding an option to tell U-Boot to use -Werror, etc.? Then > those that what it can enable it.
OK. We can do it with make KCFLAGS=-Werror -- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada
