peter,

to clarify what i said earlier,

     WDTCTL = WDTPW + WDTHOLD;              // Stop WDT

was the fourth line in a setup fn called as the first line in main. 
moving the register assignment itself to the first line of main did not 
change the behavior.  but 32 ms is a long time, so i wouldn't expect 
moving it back in time < 1 us would make a difference.

as i mentioned earlier, the code and the build are dirt-simple.  i will 
file a bug report so someone can take a closer look.

thanks,

steve

On 09/29/2011 12:44 PM, Peter Bigot wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 11:38 AM, steve ayer<a...@handhelds.org>  wrote:
>
>> hi peter,
>>
>> that was it!
>>
>> i assumed that stopping the watchdog in sw (fourth line of the app) was
>> enough.  damn!
>>
>
> It should be, assuming the first three lines are comments or declarations.
> The C runtime code is expected to pet the watchdog while it's in control, so
> once main is entered you should have close to the full 32ms to chain it up
> if you don't want it barking.
>
> If you're getting a watchdog before your code in main() is executed, and
> you're not using __init functions or static C++ constructors or overriding
> linker sections or otherwise messing with the C runtime code, there's a bug
> and I'd like to see a reproducing test case filed on the mspgcc tracker at
> http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?atid=432701&group_id=42303&func=browse.
>
> Peter
>
>
>>
>> thanks very much,
>>
>> steve
>>
>>
>> On 09/29/2011 12:33 PM, Peter Bigot wrote:
>>
>>> Are you using -mdisable-watchdog, or otherwise stopping the watchdog
>>> from resetting your board 32ms after power-up?  The current msp430
>>> toolchain does not do this automatically like the old one did.
>>>
>>> Peter
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 11:12 AM, steve ayer<a...@handhelds.org
>>> <mailto:a...@handhelds.org>>  wrote:
>>>
>>>     hi folks,
>>>
>>>     last summer (july 2010) i bought a ti eval board for the 5438 and
>>>     proceeded to pull together and test the dirt-simple devel pieces before
>>>     proceeding on to trying to work with tinyos on this mcu.
>>>
>>>     short story is that is used the then-current mspgcc4; wrote my own bsl
>>>     so that i had a boilerplate for modding tos-bsl to support this mcu;
>>>     wrote a ~25-line blink in c to test it.
>>>
>>>     result:  i could compile, objcopy ->  ihex, bsl, and execute blink on
>>> the
>>>     little eval board.  nothing elaborate or fancy:
>>>
>>>     msp430-gcc -mmcu=msp430x5438 -o blink.exe blink.c
>>>     msp430-objcopy --output-target=ihex blink.exe blink.ihex
>>>     bsl /dev/ttyUSB0 blink.ihex
>>>
>>>     happiness, now i could try out real stuff.  then i got sidetracked
>>> until
>>>     now.
>>>
>>>     following all of work of peter bigot, eric decker, razvan, et. al on
>>> the
>>>     uniarch toolchain, i pulled the latest assembled bits (most easily from
>>>     tinyprod.net<http://tinyprod.net>, thanks guys) and went back to
>>>
>>>     step one.
>>>
>>>     after the requisite header/prototype changes to blink.c, everything
>>>     seems to work properly, except that the code doesn't run.  (yes, i can
>>>     install the old ihex and make the board blink again).
>>>
>>>     a quick comparison of the working ihex file with the new one i see that
>>>     they're vaguely similiar, the addresses/sizes of the code/vectors seem
>>>     right, but...
>>>
>>>     i did try adding the -mcpu=430xv2 flag to the compile line, but that
>>>     makes no difference in the ihex.
>>>
>>>     can anyone please offer a pointer on how to proceed?
>>>
>>>     thanks,
>>>
>>>     steve ayer
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>     ------------------------------**------------------------------**
>>> ------------------
>>>     All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains
>>> a
>>>     definitive record of customers, application performance, security
>>>     threats, fraudulent activity and more. Splunk takes this data and makes
>>>     sense of it. Business sense. IT sense. Common sense.
>>>     
>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-**d2dcopy1<http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy1>
>>>     ______________________________**_________________
>>>     Mspgcc-users mailing list
>>>     Mspgcc-users@lists.**sourceforge.net<Mspgcc-users@lists.sourceforge.net>
>>>     
>>> <mailto:Mspgcc-users@lists.**sourceforge.net<Mspgcc-users@lists.sourceforge.net>
>>>>
>>>     
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/**lists/listinfo/mspgcc-users<https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mspgcc-users>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a
> definitive record of customers, application performance, security
> threats, fraudulent activity and more. Splunk takes this data and makes
> sense of it. Business sense. IT sense. Common sense.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy1
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mspgcc-users mailing list
> Mspgcc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mspgcc-users

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a
definitive record of customers, application performance, security
threats, fraudulent activity and more. Splunk takes this data and makes
sense of it. Business sense. IT sense. Common sense.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy1
_______________________________________________
Mspgcc-users mailing list
Mspgcc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mspgcc-users

Reply via email to