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

Daniel Vetter
2019-04-25T13:49:54Z

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
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation