On 2 March 2017 at 05:21, Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Anyway have hit a bunch of other issues with sparse-llvm ... :-( > > Each day its problem (and happily its solution too!). > I will submit test cases for the new problems when I get some time. But I am beginning to think that there is quite a bit of work needed to fix the issues, and in any case it might be better to create an LLVM backend from the parse tree rather than the linearized version. The current approach is very low level - for example struct member access bypasses the natural LLVM way of doing it. This approach will have the consequence that LLVM will generate poor quality code as it will not have enough information to optimise properly. The current approach is more suited to backends that directly emit machine code I think. Regards Dibyendu -- 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
