Re: [PATCH 2/2] validation: Check C99 for loop variables

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 08:39:44AM -0400, Emily Maier wrote:
> Previously, sparse would generate incorrect code in the presence of a
> C99 variable declaration inside the for statement, completely dropping
> the code after the end of the for loop. Check that it's now behaving
> correctly by entering a context and not leaving it at the end of the
> loop.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Emily Maier <emily@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---

I think a simpler test case showing the generality of the problem
would be even nicer but that would involve the output of
test-linearize and as such this is not usable in the test suite.

This test case has the decisive advantage to be testable.

Revieved-by: Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@xxxxxxxxx>
--
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



[Index of Archives]     [Newbies FAQ]     [LKML]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Trinity Fuzzer Tool]

  Powered by Linux