"Dhakshinamoorthy, Soundararajan" <soundararajan.dhakshinamoor...@atmel.com>
wrote:
> As discussed below,
I thought the outcome of the discussion was that it makes not
much sense?
>> >MEMORY
>> >{
>> > text (rx) : ORIGIN = 0, LENGTH = 62K
>> > boot (rx) : ORIGIN = 62K, LENGTH = 2K
>> > data (rw!x) : ORIGIN = 0x800100, LENGTH = 4K
>> > eeprom (rw!x) : ORIGIN = 0x810000, LENGTH = 2K
>> >}
The correctness of these data even depends on fuse settings. Do you
want to implement one ldscript for each possible fuse combination?
How are you going to handle devices with external SRAM option, do you
want to have one linker script for each per-user RAM configuration?
People could live without per-device linker scripts for more than ten
years, apparently without having much trouble. I've got the
impression that you are trying to solve a problem that doesn't really
exist at all. I know there are compromises in the way it's done right
now, but I still believe that per-device linker scripts are even worse
than the compromises we've got now.
--
cheers, Joerg .-.-. --... ...-- -.. . DL8DTL
http://www.sax.de/~joerg/
Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)
_______________________________________________
AVR-GCC-list mailing list
AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
