New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Enable clang-tidy's bugprone-reserved-identifier check #15879
Conversation
clang-tidy 3.5 hours. Is that reasonable!? Normally, it takes about 1h! |
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.
We need to get the tidy
test to run within around 60 minutes.
Interesting. I suppose that's the reason why this and other checks haven't been enabled so far ;) I don't know of a way to get this faster. Close? |
Ohh I had not spotted that the CI was failing because of a timeout. That is an absurd time... |
@blaisb It was running only for around 3h at that point 😄 |
I am wondering why this check is sooo expensive? It seems harmless. I have restarted the test to see if we were just unlucky with the worker. |
@peterrum 3h later. Something is seriously wrong. |
@sebproell Do you have a way to check on your local machine how long the clang-tidy runs take with/without the new flag? |
|
On my machine (20 threads, 64GB RAM) using LLVM 17.2 I get for the run of clang-tidy (without the initial CMake setup and partial build): With the new check enabled:
without the new check enabled:
So, the check is also slower here but not as crazy as in GitHub actions. |
I hacked my local clang-tidy installation to extract the timings for different checks:
|
So what do we want to do about this? The CI isn't my forte, so others will have to make the call. |
I don't think it's worth spending more time on this. |
I don't have an idea right now. Closing. |
As requested in #15870 (comment)