| Message ID | patch-v3-05.11-ab25b586f38-20221014T152553Z-avarab@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | cocci: make "incremental" possible + a ccache-like tool | expand |
On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 05:31:21PM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > @@ -1298,10 +1298,11 @@ SP_EXTRA_FLAGS = -Wno-universal-initializer > SANITIZE_LEAK = > SANITIZE_ADDRESS = > > -# For the 'coccicheck' target; setting SPATCH_BATCH_SIZE higher will > +# For the 'coccicheck' target > +SPATCH_FLAGS = --all-includes > +# Setting SPATCH_BATCH_SIZE higher will I suppose it goes away once the coccicheck rule becomes incremental a few patches later, but I did find this rewrapping odd. Thanks, Taylor
diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile index d62f2311107..2a106f633b9 100644 --- a/Makefile +++ b/Makefile @@ -1298,10 +1298,11 @@ SP_EXTRA_FLAGS = -Wno-universal-initializer SANITIZE_LEAK = SANITIZE_ADDRESS = -# For the 'coccicheck' target; setting SPATCH_BATCH_SIZE higher will +# For the 'coccicheck' target +SPATCH_FLAGS = --all-includes +# Setting SPATCH_BATCH_SIZE higher will # usually result in less CPU usage at the cost of higher peak memory. # Setting it to 0 will feed all files in a single spatch invocation. -SPATCH_FLAGS = --all-includes SPATCH_BATCH_SIZE = 1 # Rebuild 'coccicheck' if $(SPATCH), its flags etc. change
Split off the "; setting[...]" part of the comment added in In 960154b9c17 (coccicheck: optionally batch spatch invocations, 2019-05-06), and restore what we had before that, which was a comment indicating that variables for the "coccicheck" target were being set here. When 960154b9c17 amended the heading to discuss SPATCH_BATCH_SIZE it left no natural place to add a new comment about other flags that preceded it. As subsequent commits will add such comments we need to split the existing comment up. Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> --- Makefile | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)