Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] ci: build with Clang

From: "Ser, Simon" <simon.ser@intel.com>
To: "daniel@ffwll.ch" <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
	"jani.nikula@linux.intel.com" <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
Cc: "igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org" <igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH i-g-t] ci: build with Clang
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2019 13:54:45 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <e4a89ec2a97839b9c6c23b45fa40784091433ec1.camel@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190425134949.GB3273@phenom.ffwll.local>

On Thu, 2019-04-25 at 15:49 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 01:05:28PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > On Thu, 25 Apr 2019, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 07:15:26PM +0300, Simon Ser wrote:
> > > > This adds a build step with Clang on Fedora. Hopefully this can help keeping
> > > > Clang builds healthy.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Simon Ser <simon.ser@intel.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  .gitlab-ci.yml | 8 ++++++++
> > > >  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/.gitlab-ci.yml b/.gitlab-ci.yml
> > > > index ae8cbb67..e7d31376 100644
> > > > --- a/.gitlab-ci.yml
> > > > +++ b/.gitlab-ci.yml
> > > > @@ -47,6 +47,14 @@ build:tests-fedora-oldest-meson:
> > > >      - ninja -C build
> > > >      - ninja -C build igt-gpu-tools-doc
> > > >  
> > > > +build:tests-fedora-clang:
> > > > +  stage: build
> > > > +  script:
> > > > +    - dnf install -y clang
> > > > +    - export CC=clang
> > > > +    - meson $MESON_OPTIONS build
> > > > +    - ninja -C build
> > > 
> > > Uh why?
> > > 
> > > The thing that broken is building on non-x86 hosts, and that's the thing
> > > gitlab CI caught. I have no idea why this is all about clang (imo it's
> > > not), and I don't think we should care about clang either.
> > 
> > And why shouldn't we care about clang?
> 
> What I meant is: We already have gitlab ci targets that caught the recent
> clang regression (because a lot more broke). No one gave a shit from what
> I can tell, so I guess I'm questioning the value of more gitlab CI targets
> in general. We could fix that by going to merge requests and blocking
> pulls that fail to build I guess.
> -Daniel

I guess no one gave a shit because it was still a little bit early in
the morning. By the time people noticed the Clang patch was already
submitted. All I want to say is: Petri (and probably other maintainers
too) does monitor CI build status.

I strongly agree with you: pre-merge checks would be a lot better.
_______________________________________________
igt-dev mailing list
igt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/igt-dev