RE: [avr-libc-dev] OPTIMIZE_SPEED for avr5?

[Eric Weddington]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: 
> address@hidden 
> [mailto:address@hidden
> org] On Behalf Of Curtis Maloney
> Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 3:03 PM
> To: address@hidden
> Subject: Re: [avr-libc-dev] OPTIMIZE_SPEED for avr5?
> 
> Joerg Wunsch wrote:
> > Perhaps we could offer different sets of libraries containing these
> > functions in their speed-optimized version, in the same sense as we
> > are already offering different sets of printf and scanf libraries.
> > That way, the users can decide to use a different implementation if
> > they prefer (say, -lc is equivalent to -lc_size while there's a
> > different -lc_fast available).
> 
> My vote is always towards more choice.  But instead of -l, could we, 
> perhaps, abuse the CPU type flag, and have (for example) avr5 
> for size, 
> and avr5f for speed?

I'm not quite sure how that would work as the --mcu flag just doesn't take
an architecture type (like avr5) but the device name such as
--mcu=atmega128.

And again, how would the toolchain handle this? The driver (avr-gcc) would
have to send special flags to the linker (ld) to map to a fixed library file
name and automatically set an -l flag internally. This would mean target
specific changes to both GCC and GNU Binutils that would never have a chance
to get committed upstream.

Eric