aykevl added a comment.
Herald added a subscriber: StephenFan.

@MaskRay it was my suggestion to move this from the toolchain specific file to 
the generic file, because it makes the implementation much simpler. See my 
comment D117423#3251110 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D117423#3251110> for details.

In D118095#3282039 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D118095#3282039>, @MaskRay wrote:

> Rejecting some -mmcu= for C source files looks quite dubious. Does it really 
> help users?

For context: the avr1 family isn't supported by avr-gcc either. It's a old and 
rather limited subset of the AVR instruction set. I assume it's going to be 
rather difficult (and not worth the trouble) to write a C compiler for it, as 
it doesn't even have a fully functional stack. From Wikipedia 
<https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmel_AVR_instruction_set>:

> The AVR1 subset was not popular and no new models have been introduced since 
> 2000. It omits all RAM except for the 32 registers mapped at address 0–31 and 
> the I/O ports at addresses 32–95. The stack is replaced by a 3-level hardware 
> stack, and the PUSH and POP instructions are deleted. All 16-bit operations 
> are deleted, as are IJMP, ICALL, and all load and store addressing modes 
> except indirect via Z.

So I think the idea is to disallow this family so that users won't accidentally 
try to use a C compiler for these chips.


CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D118095/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D118095

_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to