Revised release criteria for GCC 4.0

[Bernardo Innocenti]

Paul Schlie wrote:
>>Working with the SC, I have prepared revised release criteria for GCC 4.0,
>>which are available here:
>>
>>http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.0/criteria.html
>>
>>These revisions include changes to the set of primary and secondary platforms
>>to more accurately reflect the platforms currently thought to be important,
>>and also include more realistic goals for validation.
>>
>>Comments are welcome, and we might make changes if there is sufficient
>>momentum in a particular direction. However, I would suggest that you not
>>spend too much energy picking nits; our release criteria are guidelines, not
>>absolutes.
> 
> Although not a primary or secondary platform (which are all relatively
> larger 32/64 bit targets), might it make sense to try to at least include
> one small 8-bit secondary target representative of smaller simpler RISC
> machines (such as AVR); with the objective that the target should at least
> build (and ideally generate reasonably correct, albeit possibly not optimal
> code), in an effort to try to maintain a more reasonably target size neutral
> code base, rather than let unintended large target biases unnecessarily
> manifest themselves into GCC?

I second this proposal.  AVR is frequently broken by middle-end
patches, mostly because it's one of the few targets where int
is 16bit and bigger than a CPU register (8bit).

Besides, given the amount of material and development tools you can find
on the Internet for the AVR, this CPU appears to be *very* widely used.

We also have a GDB simulator for the AVR, but I'm afraid nobody ever
tried running the Dejagnu testsuite with it.

>From my past experience with the m68k-elf target, I've learned that many
tests assume a full-blown libc and an underlying OS.

-- 
  // Bernardo Innocenti - Develer S.r.l., R&D dept.
\X/  http://www.develer.com/