Approved and committed. Thanks! Sorry for the delay, I was away for
the holiday weekend and it slipped through the cracks when I returned.
Is the revised patch acceptable?
If it is, I don't have commit access, so I'd apprecite it if someone
could commit it for me. Similarly, I can comment on the Bugzilla
entry but can't change it's state - assuming that would be appropriate
if the patch is accepted.
Thanks,
Joe
On 01/09/2016
On 29/08/2016 22:09, DJ Delorie wrote:
>
> Which results in a more user-obvious case, ignoring the interrupt
> attribute or ignoring the weak attribute? I would think that we never
> want to compile and link successfully if we can't do what the user
> wants, and omitting an interrupt handler
Which results in a more user-obvious case, ignoring the interrupt
attribute or ignoring the weak attribute? I would think that we never
want to compile and link successfully if we can't do what the user
wants, and omitting an interrupt handler is... bad.
I think this should either be a hard
The msp430 target supports an "interrupt" attribute, which can take an optional
argument specifying the interrupt number. If this argument is provided then the
compiler will output an __interrupt_vector_ section that the linker
script can use to create a vector table.
PR target/70713
