On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 12:23 AM, Dibyendu Majumdar <mobile@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Thank you. I am trying out this change as I am hoping it will help > avoid the incorrect simplifications we saw in some cases. So far my > findings are: > > It solves the bit field access issue: i.e. this test works > (https://github.com/dibyendumajumdar/dmr_c/blob/master/tests/set1/onebit.c). Yes, it's the one I used for the patches. > But it doesn't help with the issue with pseudos defined in one branch > of the code (https://github.com/dibyendumajumdar/dmr_c/blob/master/tests/bugs/simplifybug.c). > > Is there another fix / patch that you made to overcome above issue or > would you expect both issues to be fixed by this change? I don't know exactly what you have as problem with this other test. I quickly looked at the output of test-linearize and I saw no problem with self-defined pseudos. The phi-nodes are very wrong though but that's another problem. You may try the new SSA construction at : https://github.com/lucvoo/sparse/tree/sssa It will help a lot. But in both case, I saw that sparse-llvm crashes (which is normal as none of the LLVM fixes are applied here). In the coming days, I'll do a branch that aggregates all the good stuff. But until then, can you explain exactly what is wrong with this second test? > I will run my test cases with this change and report if anything breaks. Thanks. Testing in other environments, with other goals, is very useful. -- 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
