[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: |
Weddington, Eric |
Subject: |
Re: [avr-gcc-list] >4.5.1 better than this at register-structure (xmega) access? |
Date: |
Wed, 10 Oct 2012 21:24:08 +0000 |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: address@hidden
> [mailto:address@hidden On
> Behalf Of Erik Walthinsen
> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 3:13 PM
> To: avr-gcc-list
> Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] >4.5.1 better than this at register-structure
> (xmega) access?
>
> 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.
Johann is being pedantic. Atmel has their own set of patches, i.e. it *is* a
private port, because those patches aren't fully submitted upstream yet.
>
> 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.
I'm working on getting Atmel's patches upstream.
But specifically to your problem: I've had a latent concern about the xmega
register definitions via structure layout. My concern is that the compiler
would do exactly as you describe and always try to do an address/offset type of
access to registers.
But as you said: Does it do that with recent versions? I'm afraid that no one
yet knows.
Eric Weddington
- [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?, 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