From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pavel Roskin Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] Hardcode actual type sizes, add -m32 support Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2007 02:44:21 -0400 Message-ID: <1183013061.32164.31.camel@dv> References: <20070628053954.30704.66440.stgit@dv.roinet.com> <20070628053959.30704.91680.stgit@dv.roinet.com> <20070628055850.GE21478@ftp.linux.org.uk> <46834FA0.8010201@freedesktop.org> <46835471.4070000@garzik.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:49927 "EHLO fencepost.gnu.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759125AbXF1Go0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Jun 2007 02:44:26 -0400 Received: from proski by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1I3njt-00029H-Gr for linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org; Thu, 28 Jun 2007 02:44:25 -0400 In-Reply-To: <46835471.4070000@garzik.org> Sender: linux-sparse-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff Garzik Cc: Josh Triplett , Al Viro , linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2007-06-28 at 02:25 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: > Josh Triplett wrote: > > While I agree that I'd like a better approach (specifically, I want any Sparse > > build to support any target arch), I don't yet have a solution for that, and > > this patch does at least seem like an improvement over the current hardcoded > > values. > > That's my desire as well: My ideal sparse backend should be able to > compile x86, x86-64, ppc64, ia64, arm, etc. with just a change of > command line switches. That would probably mean having some runtime-loadable files describing the architectures, as you would not want to describe the architecture with several switches. Perhaps some machine options could be described in those files, namely whether they are acceptable and how they affect the architecture description. > The gcc approach is just bloody awful. Ironically, gcc specfiles do something like that. Of course, they are not sufficient to actually _compile_ the code, but they may be sufficient to verify that code. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin