From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Josh Triplett Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: LLVM and PSEUDO_REG/PSEUDO_PHI Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2011 09:16:40 -0700 Message-ID: <20110829161640.GA23515@leaf> References: <4E58731A.7010708@garzik.org> <4E58AE9E.1090601@garzik.org> <4E59478C.9000504@garzik.org> <4E5A129F.1090801@garzik.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from relay4-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.196]:60234 "EHLO relay4-d.mail.gandi.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753973Ab1H2QQs (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Aug 2011 12:16:48 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-sparse-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org To: Pekka Enberg Cc: Jeff Garzik , Linus Torvalds , Sparse Mailing-list On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 05:42:49PM +0300, Pekka Enberg wrote: > On Sun, 28 Aug 2011, Jeff Garzik wrote: > >* it will soon be necessary to pay more attention to > >target-specific details. we need some mechanism for specifying > >i386, x86-64, etc. so that we may fill in bits_in_pointer and > >similar values properly. This may involve some sparse hacking > >IIRC, because sparse (used to be?) largely hardcoded to use i386 > >target values when checking. Or maybe this is already done, and I > >just am ignorant of that area of the code. > > Can you think of anything else except target.c that needs to be > fixed in sparse? Take a look at the cgcc script. Most of what it does to handle target-specific information should occur in sparse instead. - Josh Triplett