Subject: Re: [kbuild-all] Re: [PATCH 4/5] arm64: vdso: Add getcpu() implementation

From: Philip Li <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2020 22:20:53 +0800

On Mon, Jun 08, 2020 at 12:09:01PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 08, 2020 at 03:46:57PM +0800, Li Zhijian wrote:
> > On 6/6/20 12:35 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> 
> > > > arch/arm64/kernel/vdso/vgettimeofday.c:9:5: warning: no previous prototype for '__kernel_clock_gettime' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
> > > > 9 | int __kernel_clock_gettime(clockid_t clock,
> > > > |     ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> > > I'm not seeing this here and what we're doing is in line with the
> > > existing idiom as can be seen from the __kernel_clock_gettime() code
> > > flagging the same thing.  Possibly an old/outdated toolchain?
> 
> > Actually, the origin mail contained 4 warnings,  and only one is *new*, as
> > the mail mentioned that
> 
> > > All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>, old ones prefixed by <<):
> 
> > 0Day/LKP had marked the *new* ones prefixed by '>>'
> 
> My point here is that all the warnings, both old and new, look spurious
> and the new warning comes from following the pattern that generates the
> existing warnings.  I'm not seeing any of those warnings locally or in
> other build services like KernelCI.
Thanks Mark for the input. Here the 0-day kernel bot uses W=1 to build which
is mentioned as part of reproduce step.

> reproduce (this is a W=1 build):

And we just add FAQ at https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki/LKP-FAQ#how-is-one-meant-to-act-on-w1-reports-like--wmissing-prototypes
to explain the the missing-prototypes warning, hope this can provide
extra information.

Thanks

> _______________________________________________
> kbuild-all mailing list -- [email-masked]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email-masked]

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
[email-masked]
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel