On 4/21/2015 1:46 AM, BBBx wrote: > > "/tmp/01134q33McW", ERROR! at line 58: [E0003] Invalid instruction > SBBO r9, r8, 0, 4 > > if I add "&" before the first argument (SBBO &r9, r8, 0, 4) it works fine > and seems to be working. > > what is the reason of such behavoir? > > ps: TI's wiki allow both types of addressing and it says both types are > eual. ( > http://processors.wiki.ti.com/index.php/PRU_Assembly_Instructions#Store_Byte_Burst_.28SBBO.29 > )
IIRC, I saw it mentioned somewhere that the indirect method of accessing registers "&r9" was the first way the instruction was implemented and the short-hand "r9" was added later. I'd guess the C compiler has an older version of the assembler built-in and doesn't recognize the new form. -- Charles Steinkuehler [email protected] -- For more options, visit http://beagleboard.org/discuss --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BeagleBoard" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
