On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Pekka Enberg <penberg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Suggested-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Hey, I obviously like it since I suggested it, but I wonder if you
shouldn't handle the FP cases too?
You have lost the
assert(!symbol_is_fp_type(insn->type));
but I do suspect that the same code should be able to largely just
handle the FP cases (you'd obviously need to translate the sparse
OP_SET_NE things into the proper LLVM LLVMfpEQ or whatever LLVM does).
That said, if you don't handle the FP cases, I think you should
re-introduce the assert().
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
