On 12 March 2017 at 19:53, Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 07:40:18PM +0000, Dibyendu Majumdar wrote: >> At present there are a bunch of asserts for scenarios not handled by >> Sparse LLVM backend. A more robust error handling method is needed >> that works even in release builds, and doesn't abort the process. >> Given the way the code is structured currently, I was thinking maybe >> it will be easiest to use setjmp/longjmp mechanism to terminate the >> LLVM backend on error. I am not sure that this entirely safe with LLVM >> as the LLVM code is C++ - I think it might be okay as long as the LLVM >> module / context is properly disposed at the end. > > By far, the best thing that can be done is to add support for the missing > features/scenarios so that those asserts can be removed. > Agreed, but that will probably take some time. In the meantime even with the subset supported by Sparse-LLVM it can be used in applications - provided it deals with supported features gracefully and generates correct code for supported features. 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
