On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 09:03:18PM +0100, Stefano Brivio wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Feb 2026 13:52:04 -0500
> Peter Foley <pefoley@google.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 12:53 PM Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com> wrote:
> > 
> > >
> > > What I was suggesting was to sprinkle the code with beauties such as:
> > >
> > >         /* NOLINTNEXTLINE(misc-include-cleaner) */
> > >  
> > 
> > Unfortunatly it needs to go before the usage, not the include.
> 
> Ah, right, of course.
> 
> > > before each "offending" include line... assuming it works, and
> > > assuming we need perhaps 20-30 of them. But if it's a lot more, then
> > > that's not a reasonable option either.
> > 
> > I get "72 warnings treated as errors" when running clang-tidy with my
> > current set of patches.
> 
> Ugh. Yet another alternative could be to enable misc-include-cleaner for
> headers only, which would probably need a separate invocation of
> clang-tidy.
> 
> I'm not sure if that will work at all though. If it doesn't, I'm out of
> ideas... maybe we should simply go back to your original patch, in that
> case, and you'll just get to "fix" things as they break (hopefully
> infrequently) in the future.

Kind if what we want is to apply the check in relation to local ""
headers, but not <> system headers.  Unfortunately, I don't know if
there's any way to do that.

-- 
David Gibson (he or they)	| 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