Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 28 Oct 2019 23:11:52 +0100
From:   Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com>
To:     Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>
Cc:     Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
        linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/8] riscv: ensure RISC-V C model definitions are passed
 to static analyzers
Message-ID: <20191028221151.bpbp27x6xeotbvm5@desk.local>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.21.9999.1910172138320.3026@viisi.sifive.com>
 <mhng-8e06672c-a3e1-4dde-bbe9-ba1d8ab79645@palmer-si-x1e>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <mhng-8e06672c-a3e1-4dde-bbe9-ba1d8ab79645@palmer-si-x1e>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 08:09:59AM -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> 
> It's probably worth going through all our argument-dependent builtin
> definitions at the same time.  They're generated by
> riscv_cpu_cpp_builtins():
> https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blob/master/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-c.c#L35

Yes, I agree.
However, these are higly dependent on parsing -march and this is quite
arch-specific which sparse is not really needed for.

I'll add some infrastructure for this in the followings weeks.

-- Luc