[Bug target/34790] [avr] no sibling call optimisation

2011-08-12 Thread gjl at gcc dot gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34790 Georg-Johann Lay gjl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gjl at gcc dot

[Bug target/34790] [avr] no sibling call optimisation

2009-01-27 Thread eric dot weddington at atmel dot com
--- Comment #4 from eric dot weddington at atmel dot com 2009-01-27 12:52 --- Closing bug. No feedback from the OP for almost a year. -- eric dot weddington at atmel dot com changed: What|Removed |Added

[Bug target/34790] [avr] no sibling call optimisation

2008-04-04 Thread eric dot weddington at atmel dot com
-- eric dot weddington at atmel dot com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34790

[Bug target/34790] [avr] no sibling call optimisation

2008-02-21 Thread hutchinsonandy at aim dot com
--- Comment #2 from hutchinsonandy at aim dot com 2008-02-22 01:43 --- We have not gotten around to adding support for tail calls for avr. So nothing happens. So it is not a bug - but a still a valid feature request. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34790

[Bug target/34790] [avr] no sibling call optimisation

2008-02-21 Thread eric dot weddington at atmel dot com
--- Comment #3 from eric dot weddington at atmel dot com 2008-02-22 04:02 --- Can you try using linker relaxation?: -Wl,--relax Linker relaxation is implemented in ld for the AVR port, even though the documentation doesn't say so. IIRC, tail call optimization is implemented in linker