[llvm-dev] About AVRDevice.td

[Dylan McKay via llvm-dev]

>
> It is possible to make this TD file follow current microchips device list
> definition ? I am glad to take this work.
>

2. add new production devices
>

This sounds fine to me - missing additions to the device list are welcome.

1. remove EOL devices
>

I don't think there is value in removing definitions for EOL devices, as
the cost of maintenance is effectively zero.

If there are EOL features (that is, a feature that is only implemented on
old EOL devices and no current), then there may be value in removing said
feature and the logic that drives it, but it should be done on a
case-by-case basis. The maintenance burden lies within the implementation
of the actual old-chip features, not the TableGen definitions that enable
particular old-chip features for particular old-chips, for example.

Regards,
Dylan




On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:24 AM Fangrui Song <maskray at google.com> wrote:

> On 2020-09-15, Ben Shi via llvm-dev wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >
> >The AVRDevice.td of the AVR target seems too old, some devices like at90s
> have already been End-Of-Live, and some devices such as AVR DA family are
> not included.
> >
> >
> >It is possible to make this TD file follow current microchips device list
> definition ? I am glad to take this work.
> >
> >
> >1. remove EOL devices
> >2. add new production devices
> >
> >
> >Ben
>
> CC the code owner of the AVR backend.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200917/759654a4/attachment.html>