At 07:21 05-07-07 +1200, you wrote: >N. Coesel wrote: >> At 22:53 04-07-07 +1200, you wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I've just gone to compile some code for the newish MSP430F2232 chip >>> however the compile fails complaining that the arch is unknown. In the >>> list I see that the MSP430F2234 is supported (with the MSP430F2232 being >>> just a 2234 without the opamps). >>> >>> Has this support been added in a newer version of the tools, or is there >>> a simple change I can make to support the MSP430F2232 (given the >>> similarity to the 2234)? >>> >> >> You can do that. But be sure to check if the memory map is the same. If not >> you can specify the 2232 but you'll have to create and specify a linker >> description (ld) file which matches the memory map of the 2234. >> >> Nico Coesel >> >> >Would it require that mspgcc be recompiled from source for the changes >required? Or are all the supported mcu's pulled in at compile time (of >the user application)?
You won't need to recompile it. >I've made a change to io.h to prevent the warnings from that (it >previously didn't have a define for the msp430f2232). In my personal opinion the cpu type flag makes things a lot less transparent. On the other hand it makes things easier for a quick start. As far as I can tell the cpu type option is there to automatically select the right libraries, linker description file and (arithmetic) libraries. As far as I know all these can be overruled by command line options. In other words, as long as the CPU core is supported by the compiler, it should be possible to generate code for it by MSPGCC. But I might be wrong... Steve? Nico Coesel
