WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 01/04] Kexec / Kdump: Generic code

To: Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 01/04] Kexec / Kdump: Generic code
From: Horms <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 17:09:54 +0900
Cc: Ian Pratt <m+Ian.Pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Kazuo Moriwaka <moriwaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, magnus.damm@xxxxxxxxx, Akio Takebe <takebe_akio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Isaku Yamahata <yamahata@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Magnus Damm <magnus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 09:26:56 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <C15B92BD.2B41%Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <20061018005637.GB11422@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <C15B92BD.2B41%Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: mutt-ng/devel-r804 (Debian)
On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 08:13:49AM +0100, Keir Fraser wrote:
> On 18/10/06 1:56 am, "Horms" <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> >> I'll check this in, so please just get rid of the if(xchg()) hacky
> >> workaround.
> > 
> > I have to say that I entirely disagree with your solution.
> > I think the solution is to get rid of -Werror. But I will
> > remove the if(xchg()) foo as you request.
> 
> Holy crap! Getting rid of Werror makes Wall much less useful. We're too lazy
> to scan build output for warnings if they don't break the build.
> 
> The GCC developers have basically broken the unused-value checking, at least
> for Linux-style code which is heavy on macro usage. If a particular warning
> option is no longer useful, the correct answer is to switch it off.

I'm quite happy with that argument. However I personally prefer
a severity differenation between warnings and errors, that is all.

-- 
Horms
  H: http://www.vergenet.net/~horms/
  W: http://www.valinux.co.jp/en/


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>