William Grigg wrote:
All,
Does the toolchain support the AT91RM9200?
TIA
Bill
Yes and no. This mailing list is dedicated to the open source toolchain
GNU Binutils, GCC, avr-libc, etc. *for the AVR target only*. Any AT91*
processor is an ARM based processor.
However, GNU Binutils and
Joerg Wunsch wrote:
As Wojtek Kaniewski wrote:
Very good point. I've been thinking about adding a second set of
vector names anyway. Our names are completely self-invented. In the
long run, I'd rather like to migrate the names as they appear in the
Atmel XML files, which incidentally
. The compiler generates a warning when it sees a function that
has the interrupt or signal attribute, yet where the name doesn't
start with __vector.
And I put in that patch in the latest WinAVR release too. So one doesn't
have to wait for gcc 4.x to get that functionality.
As E. Weddington
David Brown wrote:
I think most or all of the avr-gcc team follow this list. They are always
interested in ideas leading to a better compiler, but it is up to *them*
what is top-priority.
Right, and that's because it's a volunteer project and there is a
limited amount of time.
Currently,
Joerg Wunsch wrote:
As the impending switch to avr-libc 1.4 allows us to make API changes,
I'd like to get people's opinions on the following:
. I'd like to get avr/signal.h and avr/interrupt.h to eventually
be merged. As a next step, we could deprecate one of those, and
issue a #warning if
Chinmay Pendharkar wrote:
Hi everyone,
I am a new member of this list. I have just started using AVRs and have been developing on a mega32 for a few months.
My question is on memory access for string operations. I realise that the two different memories have different methods of accessing,
Timothy Smith wrote:
are there any refferences with short examples on the use of avr
specific functions. i've already gotten stuck using an out of date
example, and i was wondering what you reccomend.
You can use the examples that come with avr-libc. You can also ask
around on the AVR
Haase Bjoern (PT-BEU/EMT) * wrote:
Citing from the gcc documentation:
Compiling multiple files at once to a single output file in _unit-at-a-time_ mode
allows the compiler to use information gained from all of the files when compiling each
of them.
-O2 and -Os switch on -funit-at-a-time.
Denis Chertykov wrote:
E. Weddington [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Personally I would still hesitate to use it in any type of production
environment because of these two GCC bugs:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21990
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21107
Bug #21990
Haase Bjoern (PT-BEU/EMT) * wrote:
IMO, it is not a problem of gcc, it is a problem of the C programming language
that lacks
support for Harvard architectures. In order to add support, you are forced to
leave the ANSI standard, IIUC.
Oh, agreed, completely. The only problem with GCC is
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
for code portability reasons, I would like to avoid to call explicity the
function pgm_read_byte() like in the following example :
const prog_char array[7] = {0x10,0x20,0x30,0x40,0x50,0x60,0x70};
y = pgm_read_byte(array[2]);
// I would like to to keep the
Ron wrote:
Would it be possible for the Mega329 to be officially included in the
next WinAVR release?
If there are patches for it in the avr-libc Patch Manager, then they
will be included.
Eric
___
AVR-GCC-list mailing list
Gaël Rossignol wrote:
Where can I find avr-gcc 4.0.2 windows version if it hasen't been realeased
yet??
Please respond to the list and not just to me personally. Thanks.
Well, that's the joke: you can't. Unless, of course, you build it yourself.
The next WinAVR release will be built with
Ben Jackson wrote:
Here I'm doing something like
l = ((ulong)i 16) + ...;
It's actually loading the i, expanding it, then shifting it. Once
again I'm sure I've seen gcc do better (on i386 or PPC, not sure).
If it's not useful for me to point out these problems as I run
User Tomdean wrote:
I have another problem with porting an application from 68hc11 to an
stk500.
I have an ATmega16-16 processor, clocked at 3.6864Mhz.
I have a lot of strings loaded into flash, as a processor learning
tool. Things that dump registers out the UART, etc.
The strings appear
Ben Jackson wrote:
When I built gcc for AVR I wasn't sure what the Right version of GCC to
use was. I've been using a cross-compiling GCC 3.4.4 for another platform
with success so I went with that. However, even with -morder1 and -fnew-ra,
the code is not nearly as good as 4.0.1 for AVR. My
Andy Warner wrote:
E. Weddington wrote:
[...]
I'd like some other issues in GCC 4.x to be cleaned up for the AVR port
before including it in WinAVR, especially DWARF2 issues. Here is a list
of known AVR GCC bugs:
http://rtems.org/phpwiki/index.php/GCCAVRBugs
As a Linux-hosted user
Ben Jackson wrote:
I got the impression from libgcc.S that copy_data wouldn't exist if
it wasn't needed, but I finally found in avr_file_start:
/* FIXME: output these only if there is anything in the .data / .bss
sections - some code size could be saved by not linking in the
User Tomdean wrote:
# avr-gcc --version
avr-gcc (GCC) 3.4.3
Optimization causes incorrect code. Optimization, determining that I
an thru with a variable, optimizes it away, causing incorrect results.
That sounds an awful lot like an issue with not correctly using the
volatile keyword.
Haase Bjoern (PT-BEU/EMT) * wrote:
Hi, Eric,
Welcome back!
Thanks! I'm still catching up. I noticed (too late) that you already
answered Ben in this thread.
You are slightly exaggerating :-) . I have been mainly been studying work of
Richard Henderson that had been addressing 64-Bit
Christopher X. Candreva wrote:
This has gone beyond a FAQ -- this really needs to be put into the avr-libc
documentation. Two simple lines (with possibly a sentence about the
optimizer) will save everyone a lot of time.
Can you work up a patch and submit it to the avr-libc Patch Manager?
Andrew McNabb wrote:
I'm using the math library for the first time, but the compiler doesn't
seem to like what I'm doing. I was smart enough to put -lm in the
linker flags, and I even added -L/usr/avr/lib just in case, but that
still didn't help. /usr/avr/lib/libm.a definitely exists, and it
Torsten Mohr wrote:
Hi,
i'd like to write a bootloader for an ATMega128 and some
questions came up, it would be great if you could give me
some hints.
In avr-libc-usermanual-1.2.3 there is an example in the FAQ
how to put a function into a certain section and how to put
that section to a
Joerg Wunsch wrote:
Torsten Mohr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Basically, if you want to do this, you need a bootloader that is small
enough so two bootloaders will fit into the boot region. That way, it
should be possible to reprogram the inactive half of the bootloader.
Take care to
Haase Bjoern (PT-BEU/EMT) * wrote:
Hi,
Just a brief question:
We are encountering problems when building avrdude 4.3.0. It seems that when configuring the package without additional switches, the generated make file always tries to build the documentation.
Problem is that we do not have the
Brian Dean wrote:
On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 10:11:39AM -0600, E. Weddington wrote:
Is there any particular reason why you need to build 4.3.0? 4.4.0 is the
latest release, and currently there is a 5.0 BETA in the downloads
section. IIRC there should be new configure options with both
Ron wrote:
I just realised the other day that I can use MS Visual Studio as the
complete IDE for my AVR projects. And IntelliSense is very handy.
Easy enough to add the path, but can anyone suggest how to enclose the
line number in brackets?
It's not very handy if it's not flexible enough
Royce Sharal Pereira wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, 03 Jun 2005 17:07:03 +0530, E. Weddington [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Royce Sharal Pereira wrote:
Hi,
I just observed, that while installing winAVR on Win 98 SE, the
directories are not added to the path, inspite of ticking it in
the install
Anton Erasmus wrote:
Hi,
On the yahoo groups the default reply-to address is the list address while on
the
avr-gcc list it, is the sender. I often forget to change the address to the
list, and then
I reply direct in stead of to the list. Is there some way to change it so that
the default
Torsten Mohr wrote:
The last time i compiled a program for an AVR was with gcc-2.95.2.
When compiling a test program for it, what optimisation level
do i need to set? I thought that at least -O2 is needed so that
some asm statements won't get optimised away.
(I tried my test program with -Os,
Jeff Epler wrote:
You may need to pass something like
-Wa,--listing-cont-lines=99
to the linker commandline. See the info page for as for more er,
info.
Jeff
Thanks Jeff and Raphael for finding this out. I've changed the WinAVR
Makefile Template to add this option with a setting of
Larry Barello wrote:
SFIOR, bit 4 ADHSM is missing from the latest WinAvr headers files.
BTW it was annoying to have old (albeit wrong) names abruptly removed
replaced with new names. For example the m128 headers kept the old ones in
place...
I didn't check the other headers...
Could
Mark E. Scott Jr. wrote:
The compiler I used for the PIC processor had two memory modes, small
and large, and had a compiler option that I could also specify whether
pointers were 16 or 24 bit. It would also use a bit of the pointer to
indicate whether the data was in ROM or RAM, for things
Matthew MacClary wrote:
I would like to second Reza's question about what to do when it
starts looking like your project may need wider, faster computation?
Specifically does anyone have suggestions about how to get the
computation done and also leverage a team's experience with avr-gcc
Trampas wrote:
My dream is for Meta compiler.
That is I would like a compiler where I could expand the functionality, such
that I write code to write the code for me.
snip
Additionally you could have the compiler implement polymorphism while
keeping C code. For example you could at
Russell Shaw wrote:
Only in cases where the context may not indicate where a pointer value is
required:
http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/q5.2.html
http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/q5.3.html
http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/s5.html
Thanks for the links, Russell. The first sentence in the
Geoffrey Wossum wrote:
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 06:51 -0600, E. Weddington wrote:
Tim wrote:
Do you know of an easy way of knowing differences between CodeVision and GCC so
that I may still use this book? Do you know of any good books that focus on GCC
C, since this is the compiler I want
Wallace White wrote:
Hi Jorg -
On 4/22/05, Joerg Wunsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think I could do that... my whole program may get too big to fit
into the bootloader memory region, but I could arrange the functions
such that the necessary ones wind up in the bootloader.
As for the lookup
Stephan Eisvogel wrote:
Greetings,
Bug 18251 as discussed in
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18251
is afaict not fully resolved in gcc HEAD as of today. It compiles on
3.4.3 with no problems so this appears to be a 4.x regression.
I have not filed a bug report with gcc bugzilla as
deva seetharam wrote:
hello,
there is a document on Atmel website that explains how
to
write efficient code in IAR C for AVR
microcontrollers. is there a similar document for
avr-gcc and/or WinAvr?
pls. let me know.
thank you,
deva
I responded to you on the WinAVR-users list. Are you not
40 matches
Mail list logo
