On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 9:36 AM, David Brown <david.brown@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 05/09/12 07:37, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: >> >> On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 10:35 PM, Xin Tong<xerox.time.tech@xxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >>> >>> any reason why naked functions are not support for x86 ? >> >> >> No special reason, no. >> >> Ian >> > > Is this something that could easily be moved from target-specific attributes > into more general gcc support? I'm sure the maintainers of ports like the > avr that have a "naked" attribute would be happier if it were a general > feature rather than specific to their port, and I'm sure that other embedded > targets would appreciate it. > > However, I have no clue as to whether this is a simple matter of moving code > from a target-specific file to a generic file, or if it needs a lot more > work. The way GCC is structured, it requires some support from every backend. A bit of machinery could be moved into target-independent code, but most of the work is backend-specific. It's not hard, though. In general I would support providing this attribute in every backend, but somebody needs to do the work. Ian
