Re: [PATCH] update to version 0.10

From: Pekka Enberg
Date: Fri Sep 28 2007 - 09:38:09 EST

Hi Andy,

On 9/28/07, Andy Whitcroft <apw@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> That is unfair. Every time we discuss it I state that I disagree that
> hiding mostly useful tests is a good thing. I would love the tests to
> be 100% accurate, but if I removed all the tests that can false positive
> I would literally have none. There is a balance to be struck and we
> have significantly different ideas on where the balance is.

Are you disagreeing with the numbers Ingo posted? 25,000 false
positives for the kernel is beyond silly... Existing conventions
should matter a lot and the default configuration for a static code
checker should really be 100%. So why not hide the potentially useful
warnings under -Wtoo-strict or similar command line option?
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at