https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=63901
--- Comment #5 from Peter A. Bigot <pab at pabigot dot com> --- Yes, that could work. msp430mcu in mspgcc days did a lot more than specs fragments; if interested see the relevant material (BSD-3-Clause) is in the msp430mcu repository at: https://sourceforge.net/p/mspgcc/msp430mcu/ci/master/tree/ I still prefer the specs approach because it's nicer for the users. But I'm coming to accept the alternative you suggest. So yes: remove -mmcu interpretation from gcc and require people to provide all the relevant specifications explicitly (defaulting to -mcpu=430 and -mhwmult=none). Implement a proper multilib demux based on both -mcpu and -mhwmult, rather than making all libc users take on the overhead of software multiply routines. (Ick.) Providing a tool that identifies the right -m* options for a specific MCU is TI's responsibility. They already do part of the job by providing the device-specific headers and linker scripts (maybe someday as versioned releases). Adding an msp430-elf-mcu-options script should be less than a day's effort for them.
