benshi001 added a comment. In D115982#3218124 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D115982#3218124>, @aykevl wrote:
> avr-gcc checks whether the device supports the flash bank used. For example: > > $ cat test.c > int d = 5; > const int ro = 5; > __flash const int f = 5; > __flash1 const int f1 = 5; > __flash2 const int f2 = 5; > > $ avr-gcc -mmcu=attiny84 -Os -c -o test.o test.c > test.c:4:20: error: variable ‘f1’ located in address space ‘__flash1’ > beyond flash of 64 KiB > __flash1 const int f1 = 5; > ^ > test.c:5:20: error: variable ‘f2’ located in address space ‘__flash2’ > beyond flash of 64 KiB > __flash2 const int f2 = 5; > ^ > > It does not appear that this patch has a similar check, while I think that > would be useful. Or did you leave it out intentionally? Sorry, it might be that I have misunderstood your concern. Yes, I do added a test for checking the rejection of unsupported flash banks, as shown in the test file clang/test/Sema/avr-flash.c. The best error message should be something like ` address space ‘__flash2’ is not supported on current device`, but actually the real error in my patch is `unknown type name '__flash2'`, so I write a `TOTO` line for that // TODO: It would be better to report "'__flash5' is not supported on at908515". I will try to fix it in my future patches, and current patch implements 1. support `__flashN` on different devices, and deny `__flashN` that beyond the real flash size of user specified device (though the error message is inexact) 2. generate corresponding address space attributes for `__flashN` So I hope current patch can be accepted and I will fix the inaccurate error message in the future. CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D115982/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D115982 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
