On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Josh Triplett <josh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> You should consider all types to be just "blocks of memory", and
>> sparse has already calculated all offsets etc for you. As far as LLVM
>> is concerned, the memory has no structure, it's just a blob.
>
> I suspect LLVM's optimization passes won't particularly care for that
> approach.
That's fine. We've already done the CSE and alias analysis on the
thing. And as mentioned, trying to turn overlapping (or partial)
accesses into some "named accesses" is just *wrong*. They weren't
named in the C code either. They are accesses through pointer
arithmetic. Trying to make them be somehow named would just be crazy.
Linus
--
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
