Re: [PATCH v3 00/12] Improvements to static checker invocation

[David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2993 bytes --]

On Sat, May 16, 2026 at 05:45:58PM +0200, Stefano Brivio wrote:
> On Tue, 12 May 2026 15:52:44 +1000
> David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au> wrote:
> 
> > While working on pesto, I ran into a number of awkward errors with the
> > static checkers.  This series reworks the invocation of the checkers
> > in a way that will let us deal with that.  As a bonus, it also gives
> > us static checking for passt-repair.  It also a number of other
> > cleanups to the Makefile that seemed natural along the way.
> > 
> > v3:
> >  - Rework changes to $(FLAGS) so they're much less likely to have
> >    side effects we're not ready for.
> > v2:
> >  - Fixed nasty test failure in test/build/build.py
> 
> Tested with current packaging rules / build scripts on Alpine, Debian,
> Fedora, openSUSE, and applied (dropping extra whitespace in 4/12 as
> noted).
> 
> I think it would be nice, as a follow-up, to drop the comments that 4/12
> introduced:
> 
> +# Mandatory preprocessor flags that won't be overridden with $(CFLAGS)
> +# FIXME: Could some of these be default, rather than required?
> 
> (same for CPPFLAGS), because, as we discussed, those are all default,
> can actually be overridden as distribution packages already do (so this
> is misleading for distribution maintainers), and I don't see a
> particular value in distinguishing what flags *could* be perhaps
> dropped to have something strictly building. They are all useful for a
> reason or another.
> 
> But I didn't touch those, I didn't feel like sneaking in a substantial
> change like that and I didn't want to delay this series further, either.

Fair enough.  Follow up sent.

> 
> I had a quick look at package recipes of Chimera, PLD, and Void Linux,
> I didn't test things there but I don't see any way this series could
> cause issues there.
> 
> Somewhat interestingly, I came across many different ways to override
> flags, taking -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE as example:
> 
> - Alpine doesn't override / set it at all, the test in our Makefile
>   doesn't set it there, either. Notably, this test was added in commit
>   38363964fc96 ("Makefile: Enable _FORTIFY_SOURCE iff needed"),
>   specifically for Gentoo
> 
> - Debian and Void Linux append -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2, that is, they
>   duplicate our flag, in CFLAGS
> 
> - Fedora (with my spec file, where I didn't set any %_fortify_level)
>   overrides it with -Wp,-U_FORTIFY_SOURCE,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=3 in CFLAGS
> 
> - openSUSE used to append -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=3 (similar to Debian and
>   Void Linux), but now uses -U_FORTIFY_SOURCE -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=3
> 
> - PLD Linux appends -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2
> 
> I found a rather impressive summary here:
> 
>   https://www.anthes.is/nix-internals-cflags.html

Gosh.

-- 
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

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