Re: [PATCH v2] sparse: add LLVM code generation backend

[Christopher Li <sparse@chrisli.org>]

On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 6:21 PM, Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org> wrote:
> Christopher Li wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 5:32 PM, Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Not true -- I can walk SYM_STRUCT of the function arguments' base_type
>>> passed to a SYM_FN.  Similarly so for struct-based variable declarations.
>>>
>>> With that information, you can easily back-reference lvalue uses to the
>>> original struct.
>>
>> Let say I follow this route, isn't that you can apply the same trick for
>> the
>> linearize instruction case? struct instruction has a type member give a
>> pointer to C type.
>>
>> I still don't see a reason why you have to use your own AST recursive
>> code.
>
> You mean, besides the reasons already listed?  Namely, no upstream changes
> are required, and I already have something that works.
>
> Sure, the same trick can be applied.  But that requires a total backend
> rewrite plus dealing with linearize obstacles already described (ref
> linearize_load_gen, linearize_store_gen).  Thus it is obviously a lot more

OK. The current handling of linearize_load_gen and linearize_store_gen is
annoying when you try to treat bit field as a type. On the other hand, your
V2 patch does not have bit field (yet).

In the long run, I would rather have only one implementation of the
linearization.

I will take a look at how LLVM does bit fields and get back to you.

Chris
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html