This repository was archived by the owner on Feb 25, 2025. It is now read-only.
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6k
Remove rewrapper prefix from compiler commands for clang-tidy #51001
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can these be inferrred from the
gclient_variablesso we don't have to duplicate this information?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Like are there environment variables being set?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@keyonghan can correct me if I'm not remembering right, but I believe that the LUCI recipes interpret and act on the contents of this parameter list. For example, the only way to keep a recipe from trying to start up goma is by including
--no-gomain this list.The local developer workflow for RBE will make more sense, hopefully.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yea, if it's not possible, no need to hold back this PR. This is just a footgun that you have to specify this twice. What does it mean to say
use_rbebut then not pass in--rbefor example? We could issue a follow up pr for the infra team.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That's true. But one optimization we can do is have recipes to auto append
--rbeand--no-gomaifuse_rbeexists in thegclient_variables. This should remove tons of duplication here from config.json files. flutter/flutter#144269 to optimize.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Please no more implicit configuration in the recipes! The implicit configuration of Goma and LTO in the recipes is super-confusing, and one of my goals with RBE is explicitly not to repeat those mistakes. If we need tooling to streamline the local dev workflow, then we can put that logic in the engine repo and not in recipes.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
SGTM. Thanks for the context.