On 08/28/2011 02:23 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
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.
LLVM just cares about layout.
It does not care about naming (or lack thereof). Nobody/nothing is
trying to make them named.
Jeff
--
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
