On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 03:30:44PM -0800, Christopher Li wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 2:00 PM, Luc Van Oostenryck
> <luc.vanoostenryck@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Hi Chris,
> >
> > I saw that a few patches have been pushed on the head,
> > including the two I disagreed with and which I explained *why*
> > they where wrong. Well.
> >
> > Meanwhile, I see some regressions with the current head.
> > For example some simple programs like:
> > void a(void)
> > {
> > int b[] = { 8 };
> > int c;
> > for (;;)
> > b[c] = b[0];
> > }
> > now crashes when used with test-linearize.
>
> Oops, reproduced. Thanks for the report.
>
> I see pseudo->ident polluted by pseudo->size.
> Separate them out of the union seems to fix the crash.
This will increase the size of every pseudos. This will
impact allocation time (which is not negligible for sparse),
and cache hits.
I'm sure you know that and have already checked its impact
on speed since in the past it has been something so important
to you. How much is it? 1%? Maybe 2%? More?
-- 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
