[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [avr-gcc-list] >4.5.1 better than this at register-structure (xmega)
From: |
Erik Walthinsen |
Subject: |
Re: [avr-gcc-list] >4.5.1 better than this at register-structure (xmega) access? |
Date: |
Wed, 10 Oct 2012 14:13:05 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120912 Thunderbird/15.0.1 |
On 10/10/2012 01:43 PM, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
> Such a bug has never been reported to the GCC bug tracker.
Well then, I guess I need to file one. I just have no idea how to
actually fix it, and no time to do so at this point ;-(
If nobody found it important enough to file a problem report for over 3
years (4.5 was released early 2009) I'd guess this is simply not an
important issue?
It's not a bug per se but a missing optimization, so it's entirely
possible nobody's cared enough to check. I'm a) doing some extremely
time-critical ISR routines, and b) trying to actually make use of the
struct convenience.
There is PR50448 which is similar but different and fixed for 4.7.0.
Yeah, doesn't look like the same issue at all.
Xmega is supported in avr-gcc since 4.7.0 (PR52261) so you obviously use
some private port with its own, private bug tracker.
No, I'm using a version that matched the latest toolchain source I could
get from Atmel at the time (6-12mo ago?) and took their patches
including Xmega, which didn't include any more than the 64a1u, 128a1u,
and 256a3bu. I had to go through *all* the toolchain to add in the rest
of the parts that are available from Digikey.
So, I guess I'll ask again: where do I actually get TODAY's toolchain?
I keep reading about how Atmel takes forever to release the patches to
the toolchain they ship, yet they now seem to be the "only" official
toolchain, and nobody else appears to be actually maintaining patches
separately. Unless the GCC core is actually being kept up now and
nobody bothered to mention it, but I just downloaded 4.7.2 and found the
exact same set of parts missing.
- [avr-gcc-list] >4.5.1 better than this at register-structure (xmega) access?, Erik Walthinsen, 2012/10/10
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] >4.5.1 better than this at register-structure (xmega) access?, Georg-Johann Lay, 2012/10/10
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] >4.5.1 better than this at register-structure (xmega) access?,
Erik Walthinsen <=
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] >4.5.1 better than this at register-structure (xmega) access?, Weddington, Eric, 2012/10/10
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] >4.5.1 better than this at register-structure (xmega) access?, Erik Walthinsen, 2012/10/10
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] >4.5.1 better than this at register-structure (xmega) access?, Erik Walthinsen, 2012/10/10
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] >4.5.1 better than this at register-structure (xmega) access?, Weddington, Eric, 2012/10/10
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] >4.5.1 better than this at register-structure (xmega) access?, Georg-Johann Lay, 2012/10/11
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] >4.5.1 better than this at register-structure (xmega) access?, David Kelly, 2012/10/11
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] >4.5.1 better than this at register-structure (xmega) access?, Erik Walthinsen, 2012/10/11
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] >4.5.1 better than this at register-structure (xmega) access?, Weddington, Eric, 2012/10/11
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] >4.5.1 better than this at register-structure (xmega) access?, David Brown, 2012/10/11
- Re: [avr-gcc-list] >4.5.1 better than this at register-structure (xmega) access?, Georg-Johann Lay, 2012/10/12