From: Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com>
To: Carlo Arenas <carenas@gmail.com>,
Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] developer: remove gcc 12 workaround
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2023 16:00:08 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bf10fce3-b4bc-e5db-e2c0-651d70a8a1c8@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPUEspgqGFHg-a2gZ+j6pRLQSZwVuVR9Sq3j3yvcK1LtAi1VHQ@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Carlo
On 26/04/2023 07:41, Carlo Arenas wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 8:45 PM Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 9:47 PM Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belón
>> <carenas@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Since 846a29afb0 (config.mak.dev: workaround gcc 12 bug affecting
>>> "pedantic" CI job, 2022-04-15), DEVELOPER mode has this workaround
>>> for the version of gcc that was released with Fedora 36.
>>>
>>> That version of Fedora is about to be EOL and latest versions of
>>> the compiler don't have that bug anymore, so remove the workaround.
>>>
>>> Tested not to trigger with latest gcc packages from the last 3
>>> Fedora releases, including gcc 13 from Fedora 38.
>>
>> The commit message doesn't explain the benefit of removing this
>> workaround. Is it because it's a maintenance burden? Or is it
>> preventing some future planned improvement in this area?
>
> The workaround was added for the benefit of the CI and to prevent
> failures because the buggy warning will otherwise make it fail because
> of -Werror when Fedora 36 was released and our CI started using it.
>
> Our CI doesn't need it anymore to avoid that issue.
Our CI may not need it but what users of other distributions using gcc
12? The link[1] in the commit message for 846a29afb0 suggests that
debian was also affected at that time so the bug was not a fedora
specific. We could perhaps tighten the check if we know which specific
versions of gcc 12 are affected but it is not clear that removing it
entirely is a good idea.
Best Wishes
Phillip
[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2075786
>> What is the
>> justification for penalizing users who might be stuck on Fedora 36 for
>> some reason or another?
>
> I certainly didn't intend on penalizing any users, but I frankly
> suspect there aren't any, as the bug was fixed long ago, and it
> wouldn't affect them unless no gcc updates were ever done on their
> systems.
>
> Carlo
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-04-26 15:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-26 1:34 [PATCH] developer: remove gcc 12 workaround Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belón
2023-04-26 3:45 ` Eric Sunshine
2023-04-26 6:41 ` Carlo Arenas
2023-04-26 15:00 ` Phillip Wood [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=bf10fce3-b4bc-e5db-e2c0-651d70a8a1c8@gmail.com \
--to=phillip.wood123@gmail.com \
--cc=carenas@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk \
--cc=sunshine@sunshineco.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).