public inbox for passt-dev@passt.top
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
To: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com>
Cc: passt-dev@passt.top, Rahil Bhimjiani <me@rahil.website>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Makefile: check for cppcheck's --check-level option in cppcheck target
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 08:24:49 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zd5TIYVFYoJbMWOL@zatzit> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240227162947.2442020-1-sbrivio@redhat.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2479 bytes --]

On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 05:29:47PM +0100, Stefano Brivio wrote:
> Don't run cppcheck to find out if the --check-level=exhaustive option
> is available, unless we're actually going to run cppcheck later.
> 
> To avoid this, move this check under the cppcheck target, and
> implement it in shell script instead of using Makefile directives,
> because we can't easily implement conditionals in recipes.
> 
> Reported-by: Rahil Bhimjiani <me@rahil.website>
> Link: https://bugs.gentoo.org/920795
> Fixes: 8640d62af719 ("cppcheck: Use "exhaustive" level checking when available")
> Signed-off-by: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com>
> ---
>  Makefile | 10 +++++-----
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
> index af4fa87..75d0bf3 100644
> --- a/Makefile
> +++ b/Makefile
> @@ -287,17 +287,17 @@ clang-tidy: $(SRCS) $(HEADERS)
>  	-config='{CheckOptions: [{key: bugprone-suspicious-string-compare.WarnOnImplicitComparison, value: "false"}]}' \
>  	--warnings-as-errors=* $(SRCS) -- $(filter-out -pie,$(FLAGS) $(CFLAGS) $(CPPFLAGS)) -DCLANG_TIDY_58992
>  
> -CPPCHECK_EXHAUSTIVE :=
> -ifeq ($(shell cppcheck --check-level=exhaustive /dev/null > /dev/null 2>&1; echo $$?),0)
> -	CPPCHECK_EXHAUSTIVE += --check-level=exhaustive
> -endif
> -
>  SYSTEM_INCLUDES := /usr/include $(wildcard /usr/include/$(TARGET))
>  ifeq ($(shell $(CC) -v 2>&1 | grep -c "gcc version"),1)
>  VER := $(shell $(CC) -dumpversion)
>  SYSTEM_INCLUDES += /usr/lib/gcc/$(TARGET)/$(VER)/include
>  endif
>  cppcheck: $(SRCS) $(HEADERS)
> +	if cppcheck --check-level=exhaustive /dev/null > /dev/null 2>&1; then \
> +		CPPCHECK_EXHAUSTIVE="--check-level=exhaustive";		\
> +	else								\
> +		CPPCHECK_EXHAUSTIVE=;					\
> +	fi;								\
>  	cppcheck --std=c11 --error-exitcode=1 --enable=all --force	\
>  	--inconclusive --library=posix --quiet				\
>  	$(CPPCHECK_EXHAUSTIVE)						\

IIUC, this is essentially moving CPPCHECK_EXHAUSTIVE from a make
variable to a shell variable in the shell that make invokes.  Which is
fine, but I believe $(CPPCHECK_EXHAUSTIVE) will only expand to a make
variable.  To get the shell variable you'll need
$${CPPCHECK_EXHAUSTIVE}.  I suspect as written, this will always
expand empty.

-- 
David Gibson			| I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au	| minimalist, thank you.  NOT _the_ _other_
				| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2024-02-27 21:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-02-27 16:29 [PATCH] Makefile: check for cppcheck's --check-level option in cppcheck target Stefano Brivio
2024-02-27 21:24 ` David Gibson [this message]
2024-02-28  6:23   ` Stefano Brivio

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=Zd5TIYVFYoJbMWOL@zatzit \
    --to=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \
    --cc=me@rahil.website \
    --cc=passt-dev@passt.top \
    --cc=sbrivio@redhat.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.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://passt.top/passt

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 IMAP folder(s).