On Sat, Jul 29, 2006 at 05:39:57PM -0700, User Tomdean wrote:
> ALE happens at the 2/3 point in the clk period. The output change is
> at the 1/3 point in the clock period.
Could you check what happens at lower clock frequencies? Are these
delays constant, or always 1/3 or 2/3 of the clock peri
On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 12:53:01AM +1100, Ron Kreymborg wrote:
> So a method that does away with the __vector_XX construct to produce the
> jump to an arbitrary name would be very welcome, as the compiler could then
> detect any spelling error. Darned if I can see how it could be done though.
htt
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 06:24:09PM -0500, Sparr wrote:
>Why does "foo++;" compile to "subi Rd,lo8(-(1))" instead of "inc Rd"? I
>am keeping global register variables in registers below 16, which are not
>valid for subi so they get duplicated to perform the increment. I am
>prepari
Hello,
I haven't followed the thread very closely (haven't used
avr-gcc for about 2 years now), but here is my 0.03 PLN...
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 02:07:46PM +0400, Denis Chertykov wrote:
> Do you know any real example of a program more than 128k ?
Bootloader at the end of flash in a 256K devic
Dnia Sun, Apr 21, 2024 at 10:08:11AM +0200, Wolfgang Hospital napisał(a):
>I've been tinkering around, the "ldi r_cnt, 9""rjmp entry point" in
>__udivmodqi4 instead of "ldi r_cnt, 8""lsl r_arg1" annoying me for
>years. (Biggest relative strict improvement I found, FWIW.)
Number of
If speed is more important than size (likely as most AVR chips today
have much more flash than those available long long ago when that code
was originally written), here ia a proposed (untested) patch to unroll
the loop (simply repeat the code 8 times) for >8K flash devices,
The larger and faster
On Sun, Apr 17, 2005 at 07:53:08AM +1000, Henrik Maier wrote:
> I investigated myself and had a look at the gcc sources. Using -O0
> avoids optimizing with in/out instructions. However for function
> prologues and epilogues avr-gcc still uses in/out instructions but this
> could indeed be patch
On Sun, Apr 17, 2005 at 10:02:31AM +1000, Henrik Maier wrote:
> Done all of this, tried different hardware and much more before I even
> approached Atmel. If you check the links in my earlier post, you find
> some more background info and a little test program demonstrating the
> bug. End of a
On Thu, May 19, 2005 at 03:12:46PM -0700, Larry Barello wrote:
> and somehow trick the compiler into using "rcall" instead of
> "call" (or just write the whole thing in assembly :( )
Try -mshort-calls which was added specifically for cases like this
(small bootloaders on large devices).
Hope th
Hello,
On Fri, Jun 24, 2005 at 09:57:15PM +0200, Joerg Wunsch wrote:
> Anyway, it seems that bug can easily be overcome. As the assembler is
> one-pass only, if it does not know the value of __stack by the time it
> is used inside gcrt1.S to initialize the stack pointer, it will
> automatically
On Sun, Jun 26, 2005 at 11:20:20PM +0200, Joerg Wunsch wrote:
> Anyway, do you think it would be worth a bug report for gas?
I'm not sure really - is it a bug or a feature ;-) but if it stays
that way, it should be documented (with your workaround described).
> I just did that, to both HEAD and
On Mon, Jun 27, 2005 at 11:03:36AM +0200, Haase Bjoern (PT-BEU/EMT) * wrote:
> I am presently re-implementing prologue/epilogue by RTL instead of text. I
> thought about posting it this week-end but weather was too fine and It will
> probably still take a couple of days in order to make sure, th
On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 12:05:57AM +0200, Joerg Wunsch wrote:
> As Marek Michalkiewicz wrote:
>
> > 1. Change gcrt1.S in avr-libc to call main() instead of jumping to
> > it; after main() returns, call exit(). I believe this should still
> > be backwards-compatible wit
On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 04:01:17PM -0600, E. Weddington wrote:
> I'm not familiar with the internal details of the toolset, but I was
> wondering: is there a particular reason why #4 has to go after all the
> rest? Does it interfere at all with #1-#3?
Doing #3 first should make #4 easier (less
On Fri, Sep 09, 2005 at 10:35:46AM -0600, E. Weddington wrote:
> - I do like the idea that Royce has (above) about naming the ISR
> function any name. However, I agree with Joerg, in that it would take an
> awful lot of effort. Perhaps someday, but not now.
Probably not that awful :) - see how
Hello,
see below for a proof of concept patch for mainline (not yet committed).
The "signal" attribute ("interrupt" not implemented - deprecated...)
now takes an optional numeric argument, interrupt number 1...N.
With this number specified, the function may have any name you want,
this name (not
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 16, 2005 at 11:16:59AM -0500, Chip Webb wrote:
> I've started on task 1 already (align functions & labels)
> using the winavr distribution from last February.
Please consider looking into the (IMHO much better than aligning
functions) solution, where indirect jumps/calls go throu
17 matches
Mail list logo
