Re: STM32F4 GNAT Run Time System - roadmap

[Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP>]

On 2015-12-08, Randy Brukardt <randy@rrsoftware.com> wrote:
> "Simon Wright" <simon@pushface.org> wrote in message 
> news:lya8pnh1dq.fsf@pushface.org...
>> ...I've not done any evaluation yet
>> aside from noting that they generate the GNAT-specific
>> Volatile_Full_Access aspect, which is noted in the 'under development'
>> version of the GCC docs (so, will likely be in GCC 6). Maybe plain
>> Volatile will do (but users would have to remember to access the whole
>> register explicitly, rather than leaving it up to the compiler to Do The
>> Right Thing); that would be an easy-enough patch.
>
> The ARG has decided on a different direction to fix the problem addressed by 
> Volatile_Full_Access; essentially, accesses to non-volatile components of 
> atomic objects have to be accessed with a read-modify-write cycle. (See 
> AI12-0128-1.) Various parts of Annex C will be rewritten to make that make 
> sense.
>

Hmm, one of the two I submitted last year. :-) Nice to see it moving forward.

What's the general feeling within the ARG about the related AI12-0127-1
partial aggregate notation proposal, especially as it applies to updating
bitfields within device registers ? How likely is that to happen ?

Thanks,

Simon.

-- 
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Microsoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world