From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Luc Van Oostenryck Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] fix bogus "crazy progammer" Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 10:11:05 +0200 Message-ID: <20170618081104.hxfykfovebsdt6lf@ltop.local> References: <20170616191844.86256-1-luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com> <8132b29c-0bfc-9294-8040-a2f7271affd6@ramsayjones.plus.com> <20170617034449.6clvouwqxpfiujrb@ltop.local> <3c71421d-eb26-5268-7701-568d59e5b4d0@ramsayjones.plus.com> <20170618064340.czth3trqkb4tu5al@ltop.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f47.google.com ([74.125.82.47]:36029 "EHLO mail-wm0-f47.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750968AbdFRILJ (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Jun 2017 04:11:09 -0400 Received: by mail-wm0-f47.google.com with SMTP id m125so55772949wmm.1 for ; Sun, 18 Jun 2017 01:11:08 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-sparse-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org To: Christopher Li Cc: Ramsay Jones , Linux-Sparse On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 12:24:17AM -0700, Christopher Li wrote: > On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 11:43 PM, Luc Van Oostenryck > wrote: > > > > For info, I also tested on some other platform, just for the fun > > and only running the testsuite. The results are: > > Great you have got this issue fix. > > I assume you want this fix merge for the -rc2 as well, right? Yes, sure. I would like to let it 'soak' a little bit more but I don't see well how it could be more tested. I may try the kernel on some non-x86 archs but it won't be for today or tomorrow. I have also a patch series for the root cause of the 1st patch: the misplacement of phi-nodes. This series solve all sort of problems but it's not the kind of changes for this release: it's radical changes to some pretty fundamental things and it's diffstat is: "16 files changed, 679 insertions(+), 476 deletions(-)" excluding all the changes in the testcases. This will need to wait for after the release and it's not yet ready anyway, not even close to. For the release, I also want the other fix I posted this week, the one titled "fix: add missing examine in evaluate_dereference()" which is much more straight-forward. I'll send another pull request in the next few days. -- Luc