On Wednesday, October 06, 2010 04:40:09 Christopher Li wrote: > On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 12:10 AM, Josh Triplett wrote: > >> > Can we have some "ifdef" for the blackfin architecture in the pre > >> > buffer? I agree with Josh, that do look like very much blackfin > >> > specific. We can leave the ignore attribute alone for now. > >> > >> how would #ifdefs help ? i'm not building sparse for a Blackfin arch, > >> host or target wise. if there's something more, you'd have to be > >> specific as to what you mean, otherwise i wont be able to send an > >> updated patch. > > > > I suspect that Chris meant that you could add_pre_buffer an #ifdef and > > #endif surrounding the #define, so that the #define would only take > > effect if Sparse (or the command-line options passed by cgcc or Linux) > > defined some appropriate architecture-specific symbol for Blackfin. > > Thanks for the clarification. The pre buffer is just a build in piece of > the header file. You can still use #ifdef inside the pre buffer. I just > don't want those blackfin specific declare show up in every other platform > > >> yes, these things are completely Blackfin specific, but i dont see how > >> that's a barrier for entry when both attributes and the builtin ignore > >> lists contain completely architecture specific stuff without any #ifdef > >> logic. using sparse on the Linux kernel for the Blackfin port is > >> pretty useless atm because of these missing pieces. > > No, I don't mean that is a deal breaker. That is some thing nice to have. > Do you know any typical architecture defined symbol to identify the > blackfin port? Some thing similar to __x86_64__. How does gcc know it is > compiling for a Blackfin port? Blackfin's gcc always outputs __bfin__. i'll send an updated patch once i test it out. -mike
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
