On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 08:30:19PM +0100, Van Oostenryck Luc wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Luc Van Oostenryck
> <luc.vanoostenryck@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > - drop patch 2 ("fix killing of OP_SETVAL instructions") as it causes
> > a strange unexpected change at a single place when testing on a kernel
> > allyesconfig on x86.
>
> I've investigated what was happening with this one.
> Everything is all right.
> What was happening was that the absence of the patch
> "fix value of label statement" created a lot of dead OP_SETVAL.
> The patch "fix killing of OP_SETVAL instructions" did its job
> but the code was wrong anyway and created a lot of changes
> in kernel's allyesconfig's output.
>
> So now that "fix value of label statement" is applied, you can
> safely apply "fix killing of OP_SETVAL instructions" somewhere
> after it, it won't create useless noise.
I just noticed that you have added it at the top of sparse-next
but what you applied (basically adding "case OP_SETVAL" in
simplify_instruction()) is *not* what the patch I sent did
(adding "case OP_SETVAL" in kill_instruction())s and causes
quick crashes..
I suppose there was a conflict or so.
Do you want that I sent a new patch or can you solve it
directly?
Luc
--
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
