Re: [avr-gcc-list] Peculiar code size problem
Dear Eric, Yes indeed, the total code bloated, though the function size actually reduced. Perhaps my first post was not clear on this point. I can mail you the entire code, should you wish to see it. Please let me know so I can do the needful. I am wondering as to what this cause is and any method to detect it or at the least prevent code bloat. Thank you for your time. Regards, Nayani From: Weddington, Eric eric.wedding...@atmel.com Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 1:44 AM Subject: RE: [avr-gcc-list] Peculiar code size problem Your function pulse_en reduced in size as expected. However, your overall code size increased. Without access to the rest of your code, we cannot tell what causes the overall size increase. Eric___ AVR-GCC-list mailing list AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
Re: [avr-gcc-list] Peculiar code size problem
Hello David,
Thank you for your reply. Yes this seem to be the problem Current working
program with delay call size turned out to be 7092 bytes. With your suggestion
of noinlie attribute the code is now 7086 bytes. Thank you for your help.
This seems to have solved the problem and also answered my query. This may also
help others who have similar problem. Thanks once again.
Regards,
Nayani
From: David A. Lyons dly...@lyons42.com
To: Parthasaradhi Nayani partha_nay...@yahoo.com
Cc: avr-gcc-list@nongnu.org avr-gcc-list@nongnu.org
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 5:46 AM
Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] Peculiar code size problem
The smaller size might be making the compiler decide to inline the function at
some call sites where it didn't before. You could experiment with
-fno-inline-small-functions (compiler option) and/or
__attribute__((noinline)) on your function declaration:
void pulse_en (void) __attribute__((noinline));
void pulse_en (void)
{
...
}
Cheers,
--Dave___
AVR-GCC-list mailing list
AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
[avr-gcc-list] gcc 4.7 changes
On http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.7/changes.html i saw some very interesting changes listed regarding the AVR. I did not have the time yet to see what it results in, but i am very curious about other experiences. Ruud ___ AVR-GCC-list mailing list AVR-GCC-list@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
