From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 703EF3858D1E for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2023 12:26:27 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 703EF3858D1E Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.crashing.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kernel.crashing.org Received: from gate.crashing.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id 387COOIC021430; Thu, 7 Sep 2023 07:24:24 -0500 Received: (from segher@localhost) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id 387CONbt021422; Thu, 7 Sep 2023 07:24:23 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: gate.crashing.org: segher set sender to segher@kernel.crashing.org using -f Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2023 07:24:22 -0500 From: Segher Boessenkool To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Dan Carpenter , Dave Chinner , Guenter Roeck , Christoph Hellwig , ksummit@lists.linux.dev, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [MAINTAINERS/KERNEL SUMMIT] Trust and maintenance of file systems Message-ID: <20230907122422.GI19790@gate.crashing.org> References: <8718a8a3-1e62-0e2b-09d0-7bce3155b045@roeck-us.net> <20230906215327.18a45c89@gandalf.local.home> <4af7c904-ac36-44c9-83c4-2cb30c732672@kadam.mountain> <20230907110409.GH19790@gate.crashing.org> <20230907072245.666b2fda@gandalf.local.home> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20230907072245.666b2fda@gandalf.local.home> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Thu, Sep 07, 2023 at 07:22:45AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Thu, 7 Sep 2023 06:04:09 -0500 > Segher Boessenkool wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 07, 2023 at 12:48:25PM +0300, Dan Carpenter via Gcc-patches wrote: > > No. You should patch your program, instead. One easy way is to add a > > -Wno-error at the end of your command lines. Or even just -w if you > > want or need a bigger hammer. > > That's not really possible when bisecting a kernel bug into older kernels. > The build system is highly complex and requires hundreds of changes to do > what you suggested. As it is for a bisection that takes a minimum of 13 > iterations, your approach just isn't feasible. Isn't this exactly what KCFLAGS is for? But, I meant to edit the build system. It isn't so hard to bisect with patch stacks on top. Just a bit annoying. Segher