Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Return machine_mode rather than opt_machine_mode for get_mask_mode, NFC

["Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@embecosm.com>]

On Mon, 31 Jul 2023, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:

> > > That's a good suggestion! Thanks, let me try to apply myself workflow  :)
> > I'm thinking that as part of the CI POC being done by RISE that the base AMI
> > image ought to be gcc-13 based and that we should configure the toolchains we
> > build with -enable-werror-always.
> > 
> > While we can't necessarily get every developer to embrace this workflow, we
> > ought to be catching it quicker than we currently are.
> 
>  I wonder if we should enable the option by default, perhaps under certain 
> conditions such as matching the build compiler version, for builds made 
> from a Git checkout rather than a release tarball.  I suspect some people 
> are simply not aware of this option.

 Also the Linux kernel community has bots that monitor the relevant 
mailing lists for patches, apply them, build in various configurations, 
and report back any issues, so when you submit a change that doesn't 
compile in some cases, then it's often within minutes that you get a 
notification, even before anyone has a chance to review your submission.  
That also helps maintainers catch such issues before a change gets merged 
anywhere.

 Cf. <https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki>, 
<https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/topic-technology/open/linux-kernel-performance/overview.html>.

 That surely hasn't come for free, someone had to make the infrastructure,
and then with contemporary hardware the Linux kernel often builds within 
seconds, which we don't have the luxury of, but I wonder if it's an 
approach that has been previously considered for GCC.  Overall I think the 
more effort we can offload to automata the less remains for us.

  Maciej