Re: [dpdk-stable] [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] mk: fix unsupported flag error on armhf architercture

[Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>]

12/11/2019 06:25, Phil Yang (Arm Technology China):
> From: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
> > On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 06:34:20PM +0800, Phil Yang wrote:
> > > The older version (e.g. version 7.4.0 ) of GNU C compiler for the armhf
> > > architecture doesn't support the flag '-Wno-address-of-packed-member',
> > > so remove this flag for aarch32.
> > >
> > > Fixes: a385972c3675 ("mk: disable warning for packed member pointer")
> > > Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Phil Yang <phil.yang@arm.com>
> > > Reviewed-by: Gavin Hu <gavin.hu@arm.com>
> > > Tested-by: Joyce Kong <joyce.kong@arm.com>
> > >
> > > ---
> > >  mk/toolchain/gcc/rte.vars.mk | 2 ++
> > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/mk/toolchain/gcc/rte.vars.mk b/mk/toolchain/gcc/rte.vars.mk
> > > index 9fc7041..ec0cbbf 100644
> > > --- a/mk/toolchain/gcc/rte.vars.mk
> > > +++ b/mk/toolchain/gcc/rte.vars.mk
> > > @@ -100,7 +100,9 @@ WERROR_FLAGS += -Wno-format-truncation
> > >  endif
> > >
> > >  # disable packed member unalign warnings
> > > +ifneq ($(CONFIG_RTE_ARCH_ARM), y)
> > >  WERROR_FLAGS += -Wno-address-of-packed-member
> > > +endif
> > >
> > You don't need to do this, as gcc will not complain about this unknown flag
> > unless you have other issues in your code.[1] I think it's better to keep the
> > code clean in this case, otherwise we'll have the code littered with
> > conditionals for various flags.
> > 
> > /Bruce
> > 
> > [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Warning-Options.html
> > "When an unrecognized warning option is requested (e.g.,
> > -Wunknown-warning), GCC emits a diagnostic stating that the option is not
> > recognized. However, if the -Wno- form is used, the behavior is slightly
> > different: no diagnostic is produced for -Wno-unknown-warning unless other
> > diagnostics are being produced. This allows the use of new -Wno- options
> > with old compilers, but if something goes wrong, the compiler warns that an
> > unrecognized option is present."
> 
> Thanks, Bruce. 
> 
> There are thousands of warnings with alignment when compiling for ARMv7 (ARMv7 supports unaligned memory access).
> Without this new flag, the build system works fine for ARMv7.  So I add this conditional for ARMv7 only.
> I agree with you we should clean up the code, but it needs a lot of effort to achieve that. 
> This patch is going to make the ARMv7 target build successfully during this period.

I would go the opposite direction.
I think we should remove all warnings disablement like "-Wno-something",
and clean the code.

If you want to allow building ARMv7, you can just allow warnings as not errors.
So we will still see something is wrong but it won't prevent from building.