Heh. This is all happening in mspgcc CVS, mspgcc bazaar, mspgcc4 subversion, and msp430-libc git (under the OSHAN project). I'm pretty committed to a solid packaged solution, and at the moment the most receptive maintainers appear to be associated with mspgcc4. I'm working towards getting them to adopt enough pieces that they're a one-stop shop.
For a quick experiment, try the 12/08 mspgcc version recommended by JMGross. If it works, you're done. It has the header fixes, but I don't think either of the other two patch sets. If it doesn't work, try checking out the latest version of mspgcc4 from subversion. I believe it has more of the CPUX and X2 instruction enhancements, and if you tell it to use the 201002* version of libc will have the header fixes. I've had little trouble building it on Fedora; a co-worker ran into some "cryptic messages" trying to build on Ubuntu, but I haven't found out what they were---it's probably some missing dependencies on the OS installation. A patch has been sent on to the mspgcc4 folks for integration that eliminates the need for project-specific multiply routines, and brings gcc's list of supported architectures more into line with binutils'. But it hasn't made it through the pipeline yet. Peter On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 2:21 PM, Anthony Asterisk < [email protected]> wrote: > I only have limited time for experimentation and possibly i can live > with the 40KB limitation. To clarify would this limitation be 40KB*4 > banks so 160KB total or actually only 40KB? > > > Does the 02/18/2010 mspgcc4 release have all the patches you mentioned? > > It seems like the patches are > * 430x/430x2 language extensions for increase flash size > * header file fixes > * 32-bit multiplication function uses wrong address for hardware > multiplier > > Any central place I can look to understand the current limitations and > workarounds? > Are there multiple parallel efforts happening or is this all under the > mspgcc4 (?) cvs? > > > Switching to 5418/5419 is not an option since I already have hardware in > hand.... > > a* > > JMGross wrote: > > The MSPGCC build from 12/08 already knows wo these 6 processors. I use it > for some time now. > > This build, however, does not have support for the 430X language > extension, so only the first 40K of flash are usable. > > There are brances of the MSPGCC wich support the 430X architecture, even > based on GCC4.0 instead of 3.23, but these are still udner development and > unless you want to experiment or even contribute to the compiler > > development, I don't really recommend them. (This might change soon as > the development seems to make progress) > > > > As long as you use the 54xx devices rather for their improved hardware > modules than for the additional flash, the older compiler from 12/08 does > its job. > > Then the 5418/5419 are a really good choice and siginficantly cheaper > than the 5438 type. > > > > You'l need, however, to download the vastly improved header files from > the sourceforge CVS repository. Many additions have been mader after this > compiler release. > > And, you'll need to fix the 32 bit multiplication function in gcclib, as > it addresses the hardware multiplyer at the wrong address (you can fix this > by including your own version in your project source code, I postet the code > > some weeks ago in this list) > > > > JMGross > > > > > > ----- Ursprüngliche Nachricht ----- > > Von: Anthony Asterisk > > An: [email protected] > > Gesendet am: 25 Feb 2010 04:07:29 > > Betreff: [Mspgcc-users] support for msp430F5437 > > > > > > Hi all! > > > > I have a new project that I'm working on using the TI MSP430F5437. I am > > trying to determine if there is an existing generic MSP430 MCU flag that > > I can use or if support for any of the 54xx series has been added yet. > > > > I saw the addNewDevice page in the FAQ. If I go that route how do I > > submit it for inclusion in the repository? > > > > If you are interested here is a description of this series of MCU... > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval > > Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs > > proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. > > See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev > > _______________________________________________ > > Mspgcc-users mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mspgcc-users > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval > Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs > proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. > See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev > _______________________________________________ > Mspgcc-users mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mspgcc-users >
