avr-libc-dev
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [avr-libc-dev] AVR toolset critical issues


From: Theodore A. Roth
Subject: Re: [avr-libc-dev] AVR toolset critical issues
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 09:36:13 -0800 (PST)

On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, E. Weddington wrote:

> E. Weddington wrote:
>
> > Hello All!
> >
> > There are a number of critical issues with the AVR toolset (binutils,
> > gcc, avr-libc) that need action soon, especially timing these with the
> > upcomping 4.0.0 release, which seems to be targeted for early 2005
> > (possibly even January).
> >
> > 1. New AVR devices.
> > There are patches in the avr-libc Patch Manager to add these devices
> > to the toolset: tiny13, tiny2313, at90can128, mega48, mega88, mega168.
> > These patches are for binutils, gcc (HEAD and 3.4.x patches), and
> > avr-libc.

Marek already committed the binutils part of this to CVS. I think Marek
was ready to commit to gcc, but at the time he tried, he couldn't test
it due to a broken build.

> > There needs to be *new patches* created for these devices:
> > mega165, mega325, mega3250, mega645, mega6450. But the important thing
> > is that these patches need to get committed.

I'll see what I can do to get a patch for gcc out by wednesday night for
review and then possible submission to gcc-patches thursday morning or
early afternoon. I don't have much free time between now and wednesday
evening though. :-(

> >
> > 2. Per-device multi-lib.
> > We've discussed this item before and there seems to be a lot of
> > agreement that the toolset needs to get rid of the "architectures",
> > which isn't really supported by Atmel, and go to per-device
> > multi-libs. Ted said that Marek had some ideas about this. There's a
> > CVS branch for it in avr-libc. But that's as far as it's gotten. Since
> > we're adding new devices, now would be a good time to get this
> > implemented, especially because of 4.0.0 coming up soon.

I don't see this happening for 4.0 at this point.

> >
> > 3. Update avr-libc auto* tools.
> > Unfortunately, the per-device multi-lib branch is the same as the new
> > auto* tools branch. Perhaps they can both be done at the same time? If
> > not, it would be great to seperate the two.
> >
> > 4. Warning on misspelled signal names.
> > Ted has a GCC patch for this. If this is good to go, it really needs
> > to get committed to GCC.

I have never heard of this being used or tested by anyone. I can post it
to gcc-patches, but I'm not holding my breath.

> >
> > Ted, Joerg, Denis, Marek: You guys have the FSF paperwork in for
> > either binutils or gcc or both. In my current situation, I can't do
> > this. It's going to be up to you (collectively) to commit these items
> > (except for #3). I would hope that these items could get in before the
> > window closes on GCC 4.0.0.
> >
> Ok everybody take a look at this on the GCC list:
> <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2004-11/msg00775.html>
>
> We don't have that much time to take care of these issues. At the very
> least can we get the patches for new devices into the toolset?
>
> Thanks
> Eric
>
>

---
Ted Roth
PGP Key ID: 0x18F846E9
Jabber ID: address@hidden




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]