On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 2:54 AM, Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Make sparse fail and return an error code if a warning is encountered > and -Werror is specified or a hard error is found. This allows to use > sparse in automated build systems to more easily catch new sparse > warnings. Most of the change looks fine. > > Due to sparse now returning non zero on failure, the test cases > triggering a error have to be adapated to check for the non zero return > value. > > diff --git a/validation/__func__.c b/validation/__func__.c > index 65ce928..6003a86 100644 > --- a/validation/__func__.c > +++ b/validation/__func__.c > @@ -12,4 +12,5 @@ static void f(void) > __func__.c:5:29: error: Expected ; at end of declaration > __func__.c:5:29: error: got __func__ > * check-error-end > + * check-exit-value: 1 > */ In stead of patching each test case file. How about teach the test-suilte to be smarter? The test-suilte should change the default return value to none zero if there is none empty "check-error-start" and "check-error-end" section. In other words, if there is expected error output, we already guess the returns status is error. The test case can still use "check-exit-value" to overwrite the default value. I expect that can save most of the patching to test case file. Thanks Chris -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
