On 18/07/17 13:53, Christopher Li wrote: > On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 3:28 PM, Ramsay Jones > <ramsay@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> I nearly have a clean 'make selfcheck' (I suspect you do too!). >> I was supposed to have gone out a while ago, ... I guess I will >> not get it finished before I go. :( > > I have send out a V2 version of the patch. > > BTW, I think most of the macro define part of the cgcc should be move to sparse > as well. In the end, cgcc can be merge with sparse as one. I think > even with all those > macro used by user space program, it shouldn't impact the kernel compile, right? Hmm, I don't think cgcc should be merged into sparse completely no. Some things from cgcc could be moved into sparse, but not everything. One of the main uses of cgcc is as a proxy for (g)cc. (Yes, that could also be moved into sparse, but why bother?) I still have the 'intptr_t' and 'int32_t' warnings on cygwin, which I could solve either in cgcc or sparse (I was leaning in the direction of sparse, because Luc has already added some of these macros). These definitions would not cause any problems on the kernel (well, if they did, it would also be a problem with gcc!). However, I would not like to say whether some of the 'platform user space' macros would cause a problem on the kernel or not. The only way to know is to give it a try! (Unfortunately, due to lack of disk space, I have deleted my kernel git repository). :( ATB, Ramsay Jones -- 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
