On 08/06/2014 01:40 AM, Philipp Klaus Krause wrote: > This looks weird to me. You seem to be using memory below the stack > pointer to hold some data (the backup of iy). Any interrupt occuring > during execution of that code could overwrite the data.
Hmm, that's a good point. Can you suggest another means through which we can avoid clobbering any registers? I suppose we could do this and disable interrupts, but that's adding even more overhead to a solution that already introduces a ton of overhead. >> Is there a more appropriate mechanism for doing this? Ideally we >> could mention to the __asm directive which registers we plan on >> clobbering and SDCC would figure out the ideal way to work this >> into the surrounding code. > > In the long term, when sdcc gets register arguments, such a feature > might be added. > >> Please note that we may not be able to use the new __asm(...) >> format, because we need to preprocess it to resolve FASTCOPY. > > You can always just write the whole functio in asm using sdcc ccalling > convention. > > Philipp I'm looking forward to register arguments, it will be very helpful for these problems. I'll consider writing the whole function in asm, but I'm not sure that'll solve the problems with destroying registers. -- Drew DeVault ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Want fast and easy access to all the code in your enterprise? Index and search up to 200,000 lines of code with a free copy of Black Duck Code Sight - the same software that powers the world's largest code search on Ohloh, the Black Duck Open Hub! Try it now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bds _______________________________________________ Sdcc-user mailing list Sdcc-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sdcc-user
