Message ID | 20200714145049.2496163-1-lee.jones@linaro.org (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | Rid W=1 warnings in CPUFreq | expand |
On 14-07-20, 15:50, Lee Jones wrote: > This set is part of a larger effort attempting to clean-up W=1 > kernel builds, which are currently overwhelmingly riddled with > niggly little warnings. > > After these patches are applied, the build system no longer > complains about any W=0 nor W=1 level warnings in drivers/cpufreq. And you need to rebase this stuff of pm/linux-next, as there are some changes in cpufreq.c there.
On Wed, 15 Jul 2020, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 14-07-20, 15:50, Lee Jones wrote: > > This set is part of a larger effort attempting to clean-up W=1 > > kernel builds, which are currently overwhelmingly riddled with > > niggly little warnings. > > > > After these patches are applied, the build system no longer > > complains about any W=0 nor W=1 level warnings in drivers/cpufreq. > > And you need to rebase this stuff of pm/linux-next, as there are some > changes in cpufreq.c there. It's based on the latest -next. Is pm/linux-next in -next?
On 15-07-20, 07:32, Lee Jones wrote: > On Wed, 15 Jul 2020, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > > On 14-07-20, 15:50, Lee Jones wrote: > > > This set is part of a larger effort attempting to clean-up W=1 > > > kernel builds, which are currently overwhelmingly riddled with > > > niggly little warnings. > > > > > > After these patches are applied, the build system no longer > > > complains about any W=0 nor W=1 level warnings in drivers/cpufreq. > > > > And you need to rebase this stuff of pm/linux-next, as there are some > > changes in cpufreq.c there. > > It's based on the latest -next. Is pm/linux-next in -next? Yes it is. Actually my bad, I based it on my next which didn't had pm/linux-next :)
On Wed, 15 Jul 2020, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 15-07-20, 07:32, Lee Jones wrote: > > On Wed, 15 Jul 2020, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > > > > On 14-07-20, 15:50, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > This set is part of a larger effort attempting to clean-up W=1 > > > > kernel builds, which are currently overwhelmingly riddled with > > > > niggly little warnings. > > > > > > > > After these patches are applied, the build system no longer > > > > complains about any W=0 nor W=1 level warnings in drivers/cpufreq. > > > > > > And you need to rebase this stuff of pm/linux-next, as there are some > > > changes in cpufreq.c there. > > > > It's based on the latest -next. Is pm/linux-next in -next? > > Yes it is. Actually my bad, I based it on my next which didn't had > pm/linux-next :) No problem.