On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 10:25:08AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Sorry for not reacting to this earlier.. No problem, of course, but since you're looking over here, hehe,s I wonder if you would have an opinion on: http://marc.info/?l=linux-sparse&m=148728997923939&w=4 and to a lesser degree: http://marc.info/?l=linux-sparse&m=148906980631077&w=4 I would appreciate it very much. > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 7:47 AM, Luc Van Oostenryck > <luc.vanoostenryck@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > This is a RFC for giving a type to constants/PSEUDO_VALs. > > This seems completely broken. Not from an implementation standpoint, > but from a conceptual one. Yes, I agree completely. I realized once I tried to make use of it. > To explain, let me give a completely idiotic example: ... > Linearization has fundamentally gotten rid of all the C types, and all > you can find are some rough remnants of them (you can find the *size* > of the type, and you can find the rough "type" of type - is it a > pointer, FP value or integer. There aren't even any signs, although > some _operations_ are signed (but not the pseudos). > > The same pseudo can have many different types. > > Linus There is just one problem, like Dibyendu noticed, it is when you use a constant in the variable part of a variadic function. In this case you don't have any type/size information from the function and nothing from the pseudo either. I don't see how this could be done without requiring that pseudos (which indded have indeed no type) have a fixed size that must not be changed by CSE or the simplifications. -- 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
