[cfe-dev] [llvm-dev] New buildbot with -Werror
Chandler Carruth via cfe-dev
cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
Tue Mar 22 17:12:47 PDT 2016
My thought was that its reasonable to expect no warnings when building from
bootstrap (as you say) and the last release of Clang. Generally, I think we
should work around warnings in the last release of Clang if only for the
convenience of folks using that release to build stage1 and using Werror.
Certainly, we tend to fix warnings even from earlier Clang versions and
from GCC in order to keep Werror clean.
On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 5:06 PM Hal Finkel via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "David Jones via cfe-dev" <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> > To: cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org, llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> > Cc: gkistanova at gmail.com
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2016 7:00:28 PM
> > Subject: [cfe-dev] New buildbot with -Werror
> > Greetings,
> > I would like to propose adding a buildbot which builds with -Werror.
> > The reason for a new buildbot in this configuration is twofold:
> > 1. It helps users who track and release from ToT, because they
> > (generally) seem to build with -Werror. Speaking from experience
> > :-), new warnings tend to crop up in a large range of commits, and
> > end up blocking one or more of these downstream users. These users
> > also seem to span several organizations, which makes coordination
> > difficult.
> > 1a. The current buildbots do not build with -Werror so that they will
> > run tests even if warnings are generated. It may or may not be
> > reasonable to enable -Werror by default for buildbots at some point
> > in the future, but I don't think it's quite reasonable to do so yet
> > (judging based on the rate at which new warnings seem to get added,
> > that would leave too many buildbots broken). Adding a buildbot in
> > the -Werror configuration should help to inform any such future
> > changes.
> > 2. It helps users who develop without -Werror (either by conscious
> > choice or by oversight). Commits which inadvertently add warnings
> > often seem to get reverted; however, if a buildbot can deliver
> > warnings quickly, the committer can submit a small fix right away.
> > I have uploaded a diff to Phabricator, however I ask to please keep
> > high-level comments on this thread:
> > http://reviews.llvm.org/D18382
> > This build would be owned and monitored by Google.
> > If there are no strong objections in the next few days, I will go
> > ahead with this plan.
> I think having -Werror bots is a good idea, at least when self hosting.
> Non-self-hosting -Werror (i.e. with older versions of Clang, or with GCC,
> etc.) might also be useful, but I'm less sure (since we can't fix those
> warnings if the warning is the problem).
> > Thanks,
> > dlj
> > _______________________________________________
> > cfe-dev mailing list
> > cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
> Hal Finkel
> Assistant Computational Scientist
> Leadership Computing Facility
> Argonne National Laboratory
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the cfe-dev