Don't run cppcheck to find out if the --check-level=exhaustive option is available, unless we're actually going to run cppcheck later. To avoid this, move this check under the cppcheck target, and implement it in shell script instead of using Makefile directives, because we can't easily implement conditionals in recipes. Reported-by: Rahil Bhimjiani <me(a)rahil.website> Link: https://bugs.gentoo.org/920795 Fixes: 8640d62af719 ("cppcheck: Use "exhaustive" level checking when available") Signed-off-by: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio(a)redhat.com> --- Makefile | 10 +++++----- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile index af4fa87..75d0bf3 100644 --- a/Makefile +++ b/Makefile @@ -287,17 +287,17 @@ clang-tidy: $(SRCS) $(HEADERS) -config='{CheckOptions: [{key: bugprone-suspicious-string-compare.WarnOnImplicitComparison, value: "false"}]}' \ --warnings-as-errors=* $(SRCS) -- $(filter-out -pie,$(FLAGS) $(CFLAGS) $(CPPFLAGS)) -DCLANG_TIDY_58992 -CPPCHECK_EXHAUSTIVE := -ifeq ($(shell cppcheck --check-level=exhaustive /dev/null > /dev/null 2>&1; echo $$?),0) - CPPCHECK_EXHAUSTIVE += --check-level=exhaustive -endif - SYSTEM_INCLUDES := /usr/include $(wildcard /usr/include/$(TARGET)) ifeq ($(shell $(CC) -v 2>&1 | grep -c "gcc version"),1) VER := $(shell $(CC) -dumpversion) SYSTEM_INCLUDES += /usr/lib/gcc/$(TARGET)/$(VER)/include endif cppcheck: $(SRCS) $(HEADERS) + if cppcheck --check-level=exhaustive /dev/null > /dev/null 2>&1; then \ + CPPCHECK_EXHAUSTIVE="--check-level=exhaustive"; \ + else \ + CPPCHECK_EXHAUSTIVE=; \ + fi; \ cppcheck --std=c11 --error-exitcode=1 --enable=all --force \ --inconclusive --library=posix --quiet \ $(CPPCHECK_EXHAUSTIVE) \ -- 2.39.2
On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 05:29:47PM +0100, Stefano Brivio wrote:Don't run cppcheck to find out if the --check-level=exhaustive option is available, unless we're actually going to run cppcheck later. To avoid this, move this check under the cppcheck target, and implement it in shell script instead of using Makefile directives, because we can't easily implement conditionals in recipes. Reported-by: Rahil Bhimjiani <me(a)rahil.website> Link: https://bugs.gentoo.org/920795 Fixes: 8640d62af719 ("cppcheck: Use "exhaustive" level checking when available") Signed-off-by: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio(a)redhat.com> --- Makefile | 10 +++++----- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile index af4fa87..75d0bf3 100644 --- a/Makefile +++ b/Makefile @@ -287,17 +287,17 @@ clang-tidy: $(SRCS) $(HEADERS) -config='{CheckOptions: [{key: bugprone-suspicious-string-compare.WarnOnImplicitComparison, value: "false"}]}' \ --warnings-as-errors=* $(SRCS) -- $(filter-out -pie,$(FLAGS) $(CFLAGS) $(CPPFLAGS)) -DCLANG_TIDY_58992 -CPPCHECK_EXHAUSTIVE := -ifeq ($(shell cppcheck --check-level=exhaustive /dev/null > /dev/null 2>&1; echo $$?),0) - CPPCHECK_EXHAUSTIVE += --check-level=exhaustive -endif - SYSTEM_INCLUDES := /usr/include $(wildcard /usr/include/$(TARGET)) ifeq ($(shell $(CC) -v 2>&1 | grep -c "gcc version"),1) VER := $(shell $(CC) -dumpversion) SYSTEM_INCLUDES += /usr/lib/gcc/$(TARGET)/$(VER)/include endif cppcheck: $(SRCS) $(HEADERS) + if cppcheck --check-level=exhaustive /dev/null > /dev/null 2>&1; then \ + CPPCHECK_EXHAUSTIVE="--check-level=exhaustive"; \ + else \ + CPPCHECK_EXHAUSTIVE=; \ + fi; \ cppcheck --std=c11 --error-exitcode=1 --enable=all --force \ --inconclusive --library=posix --quiet \ $(CPPCHECK_EXHAUSTIVE) \IIUC, this is essentially moving CPPCHECK_EXHAUSTIVE from a make variable to a shell variable in the shell that make invokes. Which is fine, but I believe $(CPPCHECK_EXHAUSTIVE) will only expand to a make variable. To get the shell variable you'll need $${CPPCHECK_EXHAUSTIVE}. I suspect as written, this will always expand empty. -- David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_ | _way_ _around_! http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 08:24:49 +1100 David Gibson <david(a)gibson.dropbear.id.au> wrote:On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 05:29:47PM +0100, Stefano Brivio wrote:Oops, you're right, I had only tested the negative case. Fixed in v2. -- StefanoDon't run cppcheck to find out if the --check-level=exhaustive option is available, unless we're actually going to run cppcheck later. To avoid this, move this check under the cppcheck target, and implement it in shell script instead of using Makefile directives, because we can't easily implement conditionals in recipes. Reported-by: Rahil Bhimjiani <me(a)rahil.website> Link: https://bugs.gentoo.org/920795 Fixes: 8640d62af719 ("cppcheck: Use "exhaustive" level checking when available") Signed-off-by: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio(a)redhat.com> --- Makefile | 10 +++++----- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile index af4fa87..75d0bf3 100644 --- a/Makefile +++ b/Makefile @@ -287,17 +287,17 @@ clang-tidy: $(SRCS) $(HEADERS) -config='{CheckOptions: [{key: bugprone-suspicious-string-compare.WarnOnImplicitComparison, value: "false"}]}' \ --warnings-as-errors=* $(SRCS) -- $(filter-out -pie,$(FLAGS) $(CFLAGS) $(CPPFLAGS)) -DCLANG_TIDY_58992 -CPPCHECK_EXHAUSTIVE := -ifeq ($(shell cppcheck --check-level=exhaustive /dev/null > /dev/null 2>&1; echo $$?),0) - CPPCHECK_EXHAUSTIVE += --check-level=exhaustive -endif - SYSTEM_INCLUDES := /usr/include $(wildcard /usr/include/$(TARGET)) ifeq ($(shell $(CC) -v 2>&1 | grep -c "gcc version"),1) VER := $(shell $(CC) -dumpversion) SYSTEM_INCLUDES += /usr/lib/gcc/$(TARGET)/$(VER)/include endif cppcheck: $(SRCS) $(HEADERS) + if cppcheck --check-level=exhaustive /dev/null > /dev/null 2>&1; then \ + CPPCHECK_EXHAUSTIVE="--check-level=exhaustive"; \ + else \ + CPPCHECK_EXHAUSTIVE=; \ + fi; \ cppcheck --std=c11 --error-exitcode=1 --enable=all --force \ --inconclusive --library=posix --quiet \ $(CPPCHECK_EXHAUSTIVE) \IIUC, this is essentially moving CPPCHECK_EXHAUSTIVE from a make variable to a shell variable in the shell that make invokes. Which is fine, but I believe $(CPPCHECK_EXHAUSTIVE) will only expand to a make variable. To get the shell variable you'll need $${CPPCHECK_EXHAUSTIVE}. I suspect as written, this will always expand empty.