On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 12:12 AM, Dibyendu Majumdar <mobile@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Actually after RC5 merge there is a change in behaviour. > > Previously it would would fail to compile when simplifications were turned on. > Now: > > 1) Without single store shortcut it fails to compile. The error generated is: > > error: no result for pseudo > minilua.c:5593:24: error: failed to output instruction load.64* > %r13018 <- 16[VOID] > > minilua.c:5593:24: error: failed to output load.64* %r13018 <- 16[VOID] Yes. Please forget about the single store shortcut: it's broken. But I'm not sure: do you mean "without the shortcut" or "without the patch that remove the shortcut"? > 2) With single store shortcut it appears to compile successfully but > when the executable is run against the 'dynasm' test the test fails. > The un-simplified version works however. But I understood you had tried with the SSA I sent link. Have I misunderstood? > Here are the linearized outputs: > > I am not sure this helps you. Not really, I was expecting the result of the preprocessing to avoid header dependencies and use the code as you're using it. For example, sparse doesn't know about the __DMR_C__ macro, we're not using the same header files, not even the same platform. >>> Note also that I have a couple of workarounds in my repository: > ... > Maybe we can look at these ones later ... Sure. But really, having small testcases with a clear description of exactly what is wrong, help a lot. Personally, I don't look at the output of sparse-llvm because I don't find it very interesting and even more so because I know there are lots of problems already in the IR we feed sparse-llvm with. But if you send some specific problems, I can for sure at least look at them. Regards, -- 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
