stable-rc build: 2 warnings 0 failures (stable-rc/v4.14.13-119-gb32d455)

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 4:22 PM, Ard Biesheuvel
<ard.biesheuvel at linaro.org> wrote:
> On 15 January 2018 at 15:17, Arnd Bergmann <arnd at arndb.de> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 4:08 PM, Ard Biesheuvel
>> <ard.biesheuvel at linaro.org> wrote:
>>> On 15 January 2018 at 13:38, Arnd Bergmann <arnd at arndb.de> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 1:30 PM, Olof's autobuilder <build at lixom.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Warnings:
>>>>>
>>>>>         arm.allmodconfig:
>>>>> /tmp/cccX4oa4.s:18153: Warning: using r15 results in unpredictable behaviour
>>>>> /tmp/cccX4oa4.s:18225: Warning: using r15 results in unpredictable behaviour
>>>>
>>>> This appears to be an old issue that only now started to get reported
>>>> here. From what I can
>>>> tell, new versions of binutils warn about two isntructions in the kprobes test:
>>>>
>>>> Maybe we can work around it using a patch like below?
>>>>
>>>>         Arnd
>>>>
>>>
>>> Can't we just add -Wa,--no-warn for this file?
>>
>> Probably (have not tried). Any reason for preferring one approach over
>> the other?
>> My suggestion for using __inst_arm() was based on that macro already being
>> used a lot in the file, I just don't know if I used it right.
>>
>> If we turn off the warnings, would you change some of the __inst_arm()
>> back intro the proper instructions?
>>
>
> TBH I didn't look at the file before replying. But it appears some of
> the opcodes trigger errors rather than warnings, so we can't get rid
> of all of them. I still think just disabling assembler warnings is
> justified here.

I have not put my patch in Russell's tracker yet, but now that I did
some tests with LTO, the warning has come back, since in the LTO
case, the "-Wa," flags to individual .c files are ignored.

        Arnd