I would also wonder if we could increase the WARNS?= level from 3 to 5 (to
match the current WARNS?= level used for kernel builds). Has anyone tried
to see how many modules would fail with WARNS?=5 ??
Thank you for your comment.
Well, I examined that (both for GCC7 & clang). Among ~ 360 modules,
- 2 (lua and zfs) need WARNS=0
- 1 (solaris) needs WARNS=1
- 136 need WARNS=3 (mostly due to sign-compare)
- 4 need WARNS=4
- Others can be compiled with WARNS=5
I propose this patch:
http://www.netbsd.org/~rin/modules_bump_warns_20190213.patch
- Bump default value of WARNS for modules from 3 to 5
- Explicitly set WARNS for modules that fail with WARNS=5
- Then, expect someone in charge will fix them ;-)
I really appreciate the effort you expended on this! I really did not
expect it.
I would be happy to have your proposed patch committed, but I would
prefer that we wait a bit so that other developers can express their
opinions.
+------------------+--------------------------+----------------------------+
| Paul Goyette | PGP Key fingerprint: | E-mail addresses: |
| (Retired) | FA29 0E3B 35AF E8AE 6651 | paul at whooppee dot com |
| Kernel Developer | 0786 F758 55DE 53BA 7731 | pgoyette at netbsd dot org |
+------------------+--------------------------+----------------------------+