On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 11:03 PM, Jeff Garzik <jeff@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> I disagree - mainly because I don't think we're interested in the back
>> end, are we?
>>
>> If we were doing LLVM hacking, then I'd agree. But as it is, we're
>> supposed to improve sparse, not LLVM, so we should make sure that the
>> _sparse_ output makes sense, and LLVM is just a code generator, no?
>
> No idea Pekka's interest...
>
> In general, my own decade-long goal has been to be able to play with a
> kernel compiler other than gcc.
[snip]
I'm also interested in hopefully being able to eventually compile the
kernel with sparse.
I'm not that interested in LLVM and really only picked it because it
seems to be simplest solution for now. I do agree with Linus that we
should improve sparse rather than rely on LLVM for everything.
Pekka
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
