2013/2/14 Weddington, Eric <eric.wedding...@atmel.com>: > If this "optimization" were put in place, then there is the potential > that these wrongly-enable interrupts could vector off to some part of the > application code, > start executing it, without ever having a return from interrupt (RETI), and > could wreak havoc > with the rest of the system, and also making debugging such a system that > much harder.
> I would have to see evidence that these devices, especially the XMEGAs, which > typically > have more code space, are so constrained that such an optimization is > warranted over > the safety of the overall system. How about "no-any-interrupt" (and no sei() in code) programs for small micro like tiny13 or tiny261 ? Anyway, one must explicitly enable this feature by --shrink-ivt swicth for shut in foot. For existing projects will not be any safety problems. -- wbr, ReAl _______________________________________________ AVR-GCC-list mailing list AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
