From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18491 invoked by alias); 21 Oct 2008 16:20:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 18482 invoked by uid 22791); 21 Oct 2008 16:20:07 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (65.74.133.4) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 16:19:22 +0000 Received: (qmail 6614 invoked from network); 21 Oct 2008 16:19:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.0.2?) (mitchell@127.0.0.2) by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 21 Oct 2008 16:19:20 -0000 Message-ID: <48FE00FF.5040504@codesourcery.com> Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 17:01:00 -0000 From: Mark Mitchell User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Weddington, Eric" CC: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, rdsandiford@googlemail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] MIPS function attributes for interrupt handlers References: <48FCFDAB.604@codesourcery.com> <258DDD1F44B6ED4AAFD4370847CF58D502FB5607@csomb01.corp.atmel.com> In-Reply-To: <258DDD1F44B6ED4AAFD4370847CF58D502FB5607@csomb01.corp.atmel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2008-10/txt/msg00882.txt.bz2 Weddington, Eric wrote: > The AVR port has a "naked" attribute available which, in rare circumstances, can still be useful. Probably because the AVR is an 8-bit micro, and can be very code constrained. This, of course, does not compare to something like the MIPS port. It turns out that the GCC manual already says that the only thing you can put in a naked function are asm statements without operands. Given that constraint, I have to adjust my position. I think that given that we've already constrained it that well, we might well allow this on all ports. I don't see any reason why it should be impossible to support that on all architectures. If we don't presently enforce the constraint, we certainly can; it's an easy thing for the front-ends to check. Richard, thoughts? -- Mark Mitchell CodeSourcery mark@codesourcery.com (650) 331-3385 x713