[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [avr-gcc-list] Code Optimisation question re: volatile
From: |
Joerg Wunsch |
Subject: |
Re: [avr-gcc-list] Code Optimisation question re: volatile |
Date: |
Fri, 23 Jul 2004 21:52:00 +0200 (MET DST) |
As "Svein E. Seldal" <address@hidden> wrote:
>> ... do you think the GCC folks could be
>> braught to accept such a patch?
>Yes I believe they would. You (or I :) ) could always try.
I'm in the hope that you've got the better reputation there...
> Usually the gcc team is very easy to convince while others you have
>to really fight.
Good to hear.
>If the patch is simple and clean, I guess that this wont be a problem
>at all.
The current patch can for example be found via
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/~checkout~/ports/devel/avr-gcc/files/patch-binary-constants?rev=1.2&content-type=text/plain
It's taken against the 3.4.x branch. I'd see whether it still fits
for the CVS head before submitting it.
>( I just remembered that the author of this patch needs an copyright
>assignment with FSF to enable checkin into gcc, regardless of who
>proposes the patch to GCC. Who's the author? )
I'm the author of it. By now, I've only got the paperwork done for
binutils, but I'd take this as an occasion to also do it for GCC.
--
J"org Wunsch Unix support engineer
address@hidden http://www.interface-systems.de/~j/
Re: [avr-gcc-list] Code Optimisation question re: volatile, E. Weddington, 2004/07/23