On 8/19/17, Dibyendu Majumdar <mobile@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I think it is an excellent idea to create a bunch of careful tests to > assess / validate the changes. Perhaps the tests should cover various > scenarios including switch statements, gotos, computed gotos, looping > constructs, etc. And specific uses of globals, pointers, locals etc. > That is the idea for the test suite. To test how sparse handle different source code. There is also the idea of the debug version of sparse. Instead having the fix input source. It will do dynamic verification of sparse at run time. e.g. If there is a slow and reliable way to generate SSA conversion. Then in the debug version will do both the slow and reliable way and the new fast and optimal way. Then compare notes to draw conclusion that the new way *is* better. AT least not worse than the old way. In this case I want to verify that, the new method at least cover all the variable converted by the old method. Including variable used by pointers. Chris -- 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
