ci: restore fail-the-PR-check on clang-tidy findings in stage A#10529
Merged
maliberty merged 1 commit intoMay 27, 2026
Conversation
The split workflow removed the inline reviewdog step from stage A, which silently downgraded enforcement: stage A now exits 0 even when PR-diff clang-tidy findings exist, so branch protection on the `clang-tidy-bazel` check passes and merges are no longer blocked on lint findings. Stage B's `-fail-level=any` runs in workflow_run context where the resulting check binds to the default-branch SHA, not the PR head, so it cannot satisfy a required PR check. Restore the old behaviour: - Stage A re-adds reviewdog (set up + run with -reporter=local -filter-mode=added -fail-level=any). The fork-PR token is read-only, but `-reporter=local` only needs the filesystem and a `-diff` command, so this works in all PR contexts. Step is positioned AFTER the artifact upload so the post workflow still has the findings to post as review comments even when this step exits non-zero. - Stage B's guard relaxes from `conclusion == 'success'` to `conclusion != 'cancelled'`, so it still runs when Stage A's check step failed (artifact is uploaded before that fail step). Signed-off-by: Joao Luis Sombrio <sombrio@sombrasoft.dev>
Contributor
|
Note Gemini is unable to generate a review for this pull request due to the file types involved not being currently supported. |
Member
|
@codex review |
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. What shall we delve into next? ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍. Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback". |
maliberty
approved these changes
May 27, 2026
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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.
Summary
Follow-up to #3465 (merged via staging into public #10521). Addresses Codex P2 finding on #10521 that landed after the PR was already merged.
The split workflow inadvertently downgraded enforcement: Stage A now exits 0 even when PR-diff clang-tidy findings exist, so branch protection on the
clang-tidy-bazelcheck passes and merges are no longer blocked on lint findings. Stage B's-fail-level=anyruns inworkflow_runcontext where the resulting check binds to the default-branch SHA, not the PR head, so it can't satisfy a required PR check.Fix
reviewdog/action-setup+ aFail check on clang-tidy findings in PR diffstep using-reporter=local -filter-mode=added -fail-level=any). Local mode only needs the filesystem and an explicit-diffcommand, so this works under the fork-PR read-only token. Step is positioned afterupload-artifactso the post workflow still has the findings to comment on even when this check exits non-zero.conclusion == 'success'toconclusion != 'cancelled', so it still runs and posts review comments when Stage A's check step failed.Why this PR exists separately
The fix commit (
fcb0180913on the prior branch) didn't make it through the sync chain before #10521 merged on public. Cherry-picked onto a fresh branch off currentmaster.Test plan