|
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 2.0.0.12 (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)
Andy 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$0.02This 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! -dave 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! Comments?
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |