On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 12:14 PM, Luc Van Oostenryck
<luc.vanoostenryck@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 6:06 PM, Christopher Li <sparse@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> I am referenitng to your email reply to Dibyendu:
>>
>> ===========================
>> It's a very surprising bug. It's not a linearization or
>> an optimization bug as the AST is already wrong.
>> With a simpler test case, like:
>> struct s {
>> char a:4;
>> char b:4;
>> };
>>
>> int foo(void)
>> {
>> struct s x = { .a = 2, .b = 4 };
>>
>> return x.b;
>> }
>>
>> you can see that the linearization produce correct
>> code for the initializer.
>> You can also see that the return statement to be
>> linearized is something like
>> STMT_RETURN
>> ret_value: EXPR_VALUE (value = 2)
>
>
> It's precisely this bug that this patch fixes.
Oh, I see. I misunderstand what bug the patch fix.
Let me go back to read it again.
Sorry about that.
Thanks for the explain.
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
