[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [avr-gcc-list] RE: Patch Fix PR35013, PR27192

From: Andy H
Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] RE: Patch Fix PR35013, PR27192
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 14:25:24 -0400
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20080213)

Thanks for feedback.

I asked for it to be committed.

This was from bug - that is what PR35013, 27192 relate too. (search gcc bugzilla with number - or Eric's list)


Dave N6NZ wrote:
Well, I don't really feel qualified to comment since I'm unfamiliar with gcc internals, but since nobody else seems to be following your progress, I'll throw in my US$0.02

This seems like a simple fix and I can't think of any other test cases that you haven't already addressed. I say we add it to the "good patch" pile. I don't recall if this came up because of gcc test base analysis or from an avr-gcc user's bug, but I suppose we would want a regression test if we don't have one.

Thanks for you efforts!


Andy H wrote:
I tested it with PROGMEM and it returns byte address (same as now)

Tested it with Labels ( ptr = &&foo) and it return word address (which I intended).

I did not test goto *ptr, as I have not loaded patch for jump/long jump (so its does nothing). I'm sure my patch for that expects words so it will not be problem.

I have  checked  switch/jump tables. That is un-changed using WORDs,

To Summarize:

Address of function WORDs
Address of function +- offset WORDS with WORD offset
Address of normal RAM variable BYTEs
Address of PROGMEM variable BYTEs
Address of Label WORDS
Address used in switch table WORDs
Pointer used in goto *ptr  WORDs (TBC)

Looks good so far!


reply via email to

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