James Henderson via llvm-dev
2021-Nov-22 09:32 UTC
[llvm-dev] clang-tidy pre-merge checks in Phabricator not working?
This isn't in reviews I've been uploading, but rather reviews that I've been reviewing. I was under the impression that this was done on Phabricator's end - I use the web UI to upload patches, and don't have clang-format (or clang-tidy) in my path, but I've seen clang-format linter remarks at least on patches I've uploaded. On Mon, 22 Nov 2021 at 09:28, Wang, Pengfei <pengfei.wang at intel.com> wrote:> Did you have clang-format in your path when you committed your patch to > Phabricator? I've observed no Lint remarks in Phabricator reviews if I > didn’t set the path. > > > > Thanks > > Phoebe (Pengfei) > > > > *From:* llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> *On Behalf Of *James > Henderson via llvm-dev > *Sent:* Monday, November 22, 2021 5:06 PM > *To:* llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> > *Subject:* [llvm-dev] clang-tidy pre-merge checks in Phabricator not > working? > > > > Hi, > > > > No idea who to direct this towards, but we at one point had clang-tidy > linter remarks in Phabricator reviews, just like we have clang-format > notes. However, I've seen several cases in recent reviews where clang-tidy > hasn't complained about violations (specifically to do with function and > variable name casing). Has this been disabled deliberately or is it > supposed to be working, but isn't for some reason? > > > > James >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20211122/c65c2997/attachment.html>
Mehdi AMINI via llvm-dev
2021-Nov-24 06:33 UTC
[llvm-dev] clang-tidy pre-merge checks in Phabricator not working?
+Mikhail Goncharov <goncharov at google.com> who maintains a lot of this infrastructure? On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 1:33 AM James Henderson via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:> This isn't in reviews I've been uploading, but rather reviews that I've > been reviewing. I was under the impression that this was done on > Phabricator's end - I use the web UI to upload patches, and don't have > clang-format (or clang-tidy) in my path, but I've seen clang-format linter > remarks at least on patches I've uploaded. > > On Mon, 22 Nov 2021 at 09:28, Wang, Pengfei <pengfei.wang at intel.com> > wrote: > >> Did you have clang-format in your path when you committed your patch to >> Phabricator? I've observed no Lint remarks in Phabricator reviews if I >> didn’t set the path. >> >> >> >> Thanks >> >> Phoebe (Pengfei) >> >> >> >> *From:* llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> *On Behalf Of *James >> Henderson via llvm-dev >> *Sent:* Monday, November 22, 2021 5:06 PM >> *To:* llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> >> *Subject:* [llvm-dev] clang-tidy pre-merge checks in Phabricator not >> working? >> >> >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> No idea who to direct this towards, but we at one point had clang-tidy >> linter remarks in Phabricator reviews, just like we have clang-format >> notes. However, I've seen several cases in recent reviews where clang-tidy >> hasn't complained about violations (specifically to do with function and >> variable name casing). Has this been disabled deliberately or is it >> supposed to be working, but isn't for some reason? >> >> >> >> James >> > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20211123/1a806b8f/attachment.html>
Mikhail Goncharov via llvm-dev
2021-Dec-01 10:01 UTC
[llvm-dev] clang-tidy pre-merge checks in Phabricator not working?
Hi Mehdi, yes, I believe I have completely disabled clang-tidy checks for premerge as people were complaining about checks not being accurate. I am planning to enable them back on an opt-in basis https://github.com/google/llvm-premerge-checks/issues/367 . --Mikhail On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 7:34 AM Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com> wrote:> +Mikhail Goncharov <goncharov at google.com> who maintains a lot of this > infrastructure? > > On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 1:33 AM James Henderson via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> This isn't in reviews I've been uploading, but rather reviews that I've >> been reviewing. I was under the impression that this was done on >> Phabricator's end - I use the web UI to upload patches, and don't have >> clang-format (or clang-tidy) in my path, but I've seen clang-format linter >> remarks at least on patches I've uploaded. >> >> On Mon, 22 Nov 2021 at 09:28, Wang, Pengfei <pengfei.wang at intel.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Did you have clang-format in your path when you committed your patch to >>> Phabricator? I've observed no Lint remarks in Phabricator reviews if I >>> didn’t set the path. >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> Phoebe (Pengfei) >>> >>> >>> >>> *From:* llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> *On Behalf Of *James >>> Henderson via llvm-dev >>> *Sent:* Monday, November 22, 2021 5:06 PM >>> *To:* llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> >>> *Subject:* [llvm-dev] clang-tidy pre-merge checks in Phabricator not >>> working? >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> >>> >>> No idea who to direct this towards, but we at one point had clang-tidy >>> linter remarks in Phabricator reviews, just like we have clang-format >>> notes. However, I've seen several cases in recent reviews where clang-tidy >>> hasn't complained about violations (specifically to do with function and >>> variable name casing). Has this been disabled deliberately or is it >>> supposed to be working, but isn't for some reason? >>> >>> >>> >>> James >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> LLVM Developers mailing list >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org >> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >> >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20211201/e0984c19/attachment-0001.html>