--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-13
21:47 ---
Subject: Bug 20288
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-4_0-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-03-13 21:47:09
Modified files:
gcc:
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-13
21:49 ---
Subject: Bug 20288
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Branch: gcc-3_4-branch
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-03-13 21:49:45
Modified files:
gcc:
--
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|4.1.0 |3.4.4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20288
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-06
21:50 ---
Subject: Bug 20288
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-03-06 21:50:37
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog
gcc/config/avr :
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-06
23:55 ---
Fixed so closing.
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED
--- Additional Comments From schlie at comcast dot net 2005-03-04 14:13
---
(In reply to comment #10)
Upon further thought, and agreeing that the explicit use of an asm macro is
likely
the most appropriate near term solution; it would appear the most ideal longer
term solution would be
--- Additional Comments From ericw at evcohs dot com 2005-03-04 14:19
---
(In reply to comment #11)
Paul,
Everybody who works on the AVR toolchain knows that it would be desirable to
have attributes to allow objects to be put in and accessed in different address
spaces. This has
--- Additional Comments From schlie at comcast dot net 2005-03-04 15:26
---
(In reply to comment #12)
Everybody who works on the AVR toolchain knows that it would be desirable to
have attributes to allow objects to be put in and accessed in different
address
spaces. This has
--- Additional Comments From bjoern dot m dot haase at web dot de
2005-03-04 19:38 ---
In reply to comment #10.
I agree with you Jörg, it is not a dramatic loss if you have a bit less
efficient use of volatile pointers :-) and IMHO anybody in the avr community
could live with it. I
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||bjoern dot m dot haase at
||web dot de
--- Additional Comments From bob dot paddock at gmail dot com 2005-03-03
13:13 ---
(In reply to comment #5)
Personally see no problem. The quote above has specifically to do with how to
write a logical 16-bit timer/counter value into a pair of otherwise distinct
8-bit registers, which
--- Additional Comments From ericw at evcohs dot com 2005-03-03 19:49
---
Subject: Re: AVR assignment of a value through a 16 bit
pointer generates out of order code
schlie at comcast dot net wrote:
--- Additional Comments From schlie at comcast dot net 2005-03-03 19:47
--- Additional Comments From schlie at comcast dot net 2005-03-03 19:47
---
(In reply to comment #6)
Nope, these are peripheral i/o registers, and like any pheripheral interface
may have
access sequence requirements which need to be satsifyed within it's driver.
These
perpheral
--- Additional Comments From bjoern dot m dot haase at web dot de
2005-03-03 22:21 ---
Hi,
in order to completely resolve this issue, IIUC, one would have to sacrifice
the post-increment addressing modes. In case of the X-Register, forcing the
high-byte first rule allways would
--- Additional Comments From j dot gnu at uriah dot heep dot sax dot de
2005-03-03 22:49 ---
(In reply to comment #9)
There has been the suggestion to 1.) distinguish between pointer variables
that
are marked volatile and pointer variables that are not declared volatile
and 2.)
--
What|Removed |Added
CC||bernie at develer dot com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20288
--
What|Removed |Added
Component|c |target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20288
--- Additional Comments From giovannibajo at libero dot it 2005-03-02
21:24 ---
Can you provide a link to the discussion in the avr-gcc list?
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From ericw at evcohs dot com 2005-03-02 22:01
---
Link to discussion on avr-gcc-list:
http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/avr-gcc-list/2005-02/msg00220.html
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20288
--- Additional Comments From schlie at comcast dot net 2005-03-02 23:07
---
(In reply to comment #0)
[The follow emphasis is Atmel's from the data-sheet]:
On the AVR to do a 16-bit write, *THE HIGH BYTE MUST BE WRITTEN BEFORE THE
LOW
BYTE*. For a 16-bit read, THE LOW BYTE MUST BE
20 matches
Mail list logo