On Fri, 02 Feb 2018, Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 02, 2018 at 12:44:38PM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote: >> >> +Knut, Fengguang >> >> On Fri, 02 Feb 2018, Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > - If clang now builds the kernel "cleanly", yes, I want to take >> > warning fixes in the stable tree. And even better yet, if you >> > keep working to ensure the tree is "clean", that would be >> > wonderful. >> >> So we can run sparse using 'make C=1' and friends, or other static >> analysis tools using 'make CHECK=foo C=1', as long as the passed command >> line params work. There was work by Knut to extend this make checker >> stuff [1]. Since mixing different HOSTCC's in a single workdir seems >> like a bad idea, I wonder how hard it would be to make clang work like >> this: >> >> $ make CHECK=clang C=1 >> >> Or using Knut's wrapper. Feels like that could increase the use of clang >> for static analysis of patches. > > Why not just build with clang itself: > make CC=clang Same as HOSTCC, mixing different CC's in a single build dir seems like a bad idea. Sure, everyone can setup a separate build dir for clang, but IMHO having 'make CHECK=clang C=1' work has least resistance. YMMV. BR, Jani. -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
