Re: [Mspgcc-users] TI compiler

Could you post your interrupt code (C) and the resulting assembler? It's hard to debug problems without seeing those... -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites,

Re: [Mspgcc-users] TI compiler

Bob von Knobloch writes: > Now the linker doesn't want to play with me - it cannot find the > "msp430g2231.ld" link file. Curious because the compiler fids "msp430.h" > in the same directory. Add "-v" to your gcc line, it will show you more info on where it's searching for

Re: [Mspgcc-users] TI compiler

This has come up before, and here's what's going on... the new msp430-elf-gcc includes all the code required by the standard, partly because... well, standards... and partly so that the testsuite can test everything. The old msp-gcc made lots of assumptions about how the compiler would actually

Re: [Mspgcc-users] New MSP430-GCC release available!

Lev Serebryakov writes: > Was support for Insight TK frontend dropped? I could not find > "gdbtk" in sources. Yes, gdbtk was dropped from upstream in 2013. It's a separate repo if you want to try to use it; we did the work to integrate it for our 2014 release but it

Re: [Mspgcc-users] New MSP430 GCC version release available!

> Agenda VR3 (did you remember this very first Linuix-based PDA with > MIPS-based CPU?) Yup, I was involved with the project way back then. > Could you please clear situation with debugging (in separate thread in > mailing list)? Sorry, that's a TI question, they provide the DLLs and SOs for

Re: [Mspgcc-users] New MSP430 GCC version release available!

> To be honest, your (RedHat + TI) way is worst possible one :-( Worst for your purposes, perhaps. We just have a different goal - a turnkey custom collection that "just works" for our customers. That means we normally include things that wouldn't be included in a system package. What you

Re: [Mspgcc-users] New MSP430 GCC version release available!

> Yep, it works, modulo DESTDIR problems, which could be easily patched. We've always used a separate --prefix for each release (typically /opt/redhat/msp430-YYMMDD/) so we wouldn't notice. > I'm not sure, that toolchain need all these separate tcl and tk > stuff (system already has them!),

Re: [Mspgcc-users] New MSP430 GCC version release available!

Two questions: 1. Are you cross-building a compiler? I.e. is the host you're building *on* different than the host (not target, which is msp430) you're building *for*? (This is called a "canadian cross" and is much more complicated than a regular cross compiler). (one typically

Re: [Mspgcc-users] New MSP430 GCC version release available!

> It is clang 3.4.1, and I don't want to install gcc, if it is possible to > avoid with some "simple" patch :) IIRC there's an option in clang to use the old semantics (-std=gnu89). --

Re: [Mspgcc-users] New MSP430 GCC version release available!

That should be built as part of building gcc/ so you probably have a problem earlier on that you didn't see in your logs... -- ___ Mspgcc-users mailing list

Re: [Mspgcc-users] New MSP430 GCC version release available!

You're probably running into a common problem with "static inline" vs "extern inline" - the semantics of those changed with the recent C standards, so not all compilers do the same thing. I assume you're not using GCC?

Re: [Mspgcc-users] New MSP430 stand-alone GCC version release available!

(1) Sources could not be downloaded automatically. You need browser. What should distributive build cluster do? There's nothing magic about downloading the sources, just use any command-line URL tool (wget, curl, etc): wget

Re: [Mspgcc-users] relocation error

Just a request, when reporting errors against the assembler, please give the assembler's version number, not the compiler's version number: $ msp430-elf-as --version GNU assembler (GNU Binutils) 2.25.51.20150212 FWIW I've reproduced this with the FSF assembler reporte above, which is the

Re: [Mspgcc-users] msp430-gcc-full-linux-installer-2.1.1.0.run

Is there an option that I missed to force it to build for the non MSP430X memory-model? If you specify -mmcu= when compiling, specify the same -mmcu= when linking, else the tools don't know which libraries to use. If that fails, add -mcpu=msp430x or -mcpu=msp430 to force the issue.

Re: [Mspgcc-users] msp430-elf-g++ optimizing out main()

main() is not a root with gcc, start() is (defined by your linker script), and is usually provided by crt0.o - except you told it not to with -nodefaultlibs. The flag you really want is -minrt, which tells gcc to encode extra information in each object that helps the linker reduce the amount of

Re: [Mspgcc-users] msp430-elf-g++ optimizing out main()

The map file is telling me a few small functions are being linked in (memset, memcpy) and I assume that since the standard library wasn't built with -ffunction-sections or -fdata-sections that it then links the entire library. -ffunction-sections affects multiple functions in the same

Re: [Mspgcc-users] replacing libgloss in msp430-elf

It's not really feasible to extract those changes and apply them to a non-bundled source directory since the base version isn't exactly GCC 4.9.1.If you or TI could provide information on whether those patches are likely to get refactored and merged upstream, and any timeline information

Re: [Mspgcc-users] No clue for thsi....

-mmcu=msp430f449 -O2 -Wall -Wno-old-style-declaration -std=c99 By specifying -std=c99 you have disabled all the GNU extensions, including asm. Try --std=gnuc99 instead, or replace asm with __asm__ in those headers.

Re: [Mspgcc-users] msp430-elf-gcc (GCC) 4.9.1 20140707 (prerelease (msp430-14r1-10)) (GNUPro 14r1) (Based on: GCC 4.8 GDB 7.7 Binutils 2.24 Newlib 2.1)

The GCC manual, chapter Extensions to the C Language Family section Function Attributes documents the interrupt attribute: void f () __attribute__ ((interrupt (15))); or void __attribute__ ((interrupt (15))) f () { } Note that the attribute tells gcc to

Re: [Mspgcc-users] Packaging for msp430-elf-*

Thanks. I see that arm-elf-gcc includes newlib in the compiler package. I’m able to build binutils just fine, unfortunately gcc has some errors with clang (stray ‘-static-libgcc’ options that are not supported by clang). While a native GCC build is likely to be built with alternate

Re: [Mspgcc-users] Packaging for msp430-elf-*

Also, why are you building msp430-elf-gcc in two steps, Peter? Can I build newlib first and then msp430-elf-gcc? How do you build newlib without a C compiler? -- Open source business process management suite built on

Re: [Mspgcc-users] Packaging for msp430-elf-*

Ah, yes, sorry. What I meant was can msp430-elf-gcc be built without newlib? I wanted to create a separate package for newlib. Typically, the gcc runtime (libgcc) needs to know what the usual runtime will be, as some routines in libgcc may need to call C library functions. The usual way to

Re: [Mspgcc-users] MSP430 simulator in gdb

Will TI be providing sufficient documentation on the CIO API that the msp430 implementation can be completed, thus making the system interface usable in other frameworks? http://processors.wiki.ti.com/index.php/CIO_System_Call_Protocol

Re: [Mspgcc-users] replacing libgloss in msp430-elf

The reason msp430 is different is because CIO *can* be used on real hardware, to communicate through a hardware debugger or emulator pod. Perhaps moving the cio-enabled nosys to a libcio.a? Then we'd need a -mcio option to gcc to enable it, but could default to doing the generic nosys thing...

Re: [Mspgcc-users] MSP430 simulator in gdb

Could you try the gdb from the FSF's source tree? It's version 7.7 and has the RH simulator in it. However, I don't think the profiling results from the RH simulator will be useful to you if you want cycle-accurate counts, but it will show you every single instruction being executed. Also,

Re: [Mspgcc-users] MSP430 simulator in gdb

Is there any best way to pass data in / out of the simulator? I guess I can use the run program and set up a memory region for the input data, and write a little main() to feed it into through the algorithm. But if there's an easier way, I'd like to hear about it before I do it the hard

Re: [Mspgcc-users] MSP430 simulator in gdb

Wait, a write() syscall made in the msp430 binary can show up on stdout of the simulator? How does that work? Do I need to link in any special function for that? The RH simulator (msp430-elf-run, not msp430-run) supports TI's CIO interface, at least for write(), which means the RH simulator

Re: [Mspgcc-users] MSP430 simulator in gdb

You need to be using msp430-elf-gcc for that feature, not mspgcc as Right, as previously agreed on, we're using msp430-foo for the non-RH tools, and msp430-elf-foo for the RH tools. -- Learn Graph Databases - Download

Re: [Mspgcc-users] MSP430 simulator in gdb

Will TI be providing sufficient documentation on the CIO API that the msp430 implementation can be completed, thus making the system interface usable in other frameworks? I have enough information to finish the msp interface, I've just had no reason to do so so far. CIO doesn't have exit()

Re: [Mspgcc-users] MSP430 simulator in gdb

Is this documented? How can I write drivers to this standard? That's the catch. It's not documented. I have a sample implementation from TI that I used (with permission) to write the simulator/libgloss code. In general, though, the target side works like this: fill up a command buffer at

Re: [Mspgcc-users] MSP430 simulator in gdb

That doesn't really help the rest of us, though. Yup, I've complained to TI about that. I'll bring it up again. I'm interfacing with other external hardware including LCDs and FAT file systems, and I want to re-use the standard libc interface at the application layer. Could you elaborate

Re: [Mspgcc-users] MSP430 simulator in gdb

I'd already outlined my expectations in the earlier thread; see for example http://www.mail-archive.com/mspgcc-users@lists.sourceforge.net/msg12038.html. If the msp430 version supplies a weak definition of _write() (not write()) newlib uses either write() or _write() depending on which

Re: [Mspgcc-users] MSP430 simulator in gdb

Can you elaborate on branch-to-self opcode? Any branch opcode that branches to itself, i.e. a one-opcode infinite loop. 1: BR #1b This also works with any indirect or conditional branch, as long as the target of the branch is the address of the branch opcode. Here's the code in the

Re: [Mspgcc-users] MSP430 simulator in gdb

You can do that with the RH newlib as long as you don't link in libgloss's versions of the low-level routines - i.e. remove -lgloss from your link line and add -lbspacm. To clarify: don't link in -lnosys if you're not compiling with -msim or don't link in -lsim if you are compiling with -msim

Re: [Mspgcc-users] Unable to use LARGE MEMORY MODEL with RH GCC

Sorry, I don't know anything about CCS, just about the gnu tools themselves. You'll have to wait for someone from TI to reply. -- Time is money. Stop wasting it! Get your web API in 5 minutes. www.restlet.com/download

Re: [Mspgcc-users] Unable to use LARGE MEMORY MODEL with RH GCC

The right way to enable large model is to use -mlarge If that causes problems, we'd need to know more about the problem to try to diagnose it. Note that adding -mlarge means that *all* objects and libraries must be recompiled with -mlarge, you can't mix and match large and small model.

Re: [Mspgcc-users] Are here any msp430-elf target full toolchain build instructions a'la gcc-arm-embedded?

There's nothing special about the msp430-elf tools; you cross-build them just like any other embedded toolchain. If you can, use the latest versions of gcc, binutils, gdb, and newlib (which is typically the development head if there hasn't been a recent release). If you download the TI build of

Re: [Mspgcc-users] Are here any msp430-elf target full toolchain build instructions a'la gcc-arm-embedded?

DD so yeah, it's probably what people want. The only exception would be, DD for example, if you were packaging for a distro and you want to DD support upgrading. In those cases, it's better for the packaging if DD the package version numbers match the upstream version numbers, which DD

Re: [Mspgcc-users] Are here any msp430-elf target full toolchain build instructions a'la gcc-arm-embedded?

(1) Is newlib-nano supported? (2) Is C++ supported? Tricky questions. Technically, if you don't have a support contract with someone, the answer is no because, well, because ;-) But the answers you probably want are... I haven't tried newlib-nano but there's no reason why it wouldn't

Re: [Mspgcc-users] msp430-elf-gcc upcoming release

So I'm guessing DJ implemented a default hardware I/O implementation in libgloss that uses the CIO infrastructure (no idea what that is, but I'm guessing it uses the JTAG Mailbox system somehow to talk with the debugger host? in which case I'd love to play with it that... assuming

Re: [Mspgcc-users] msp430-elf-gcc upcoming release

But it's not called like a normal C function, it goes through some sort of syscall interface so you don't actually link your _write() function with newlib? It *is* called like a normal C function. You really do just link libgloss.a (or your equivalent) in with your app like you would any

Re: [Mspgcc-users] msp430-elf-gcc upcoming release

I see. I guess to me a syscall interface implies something other than a normal C function call to a function that's linked with the caller. It does to me too. The *implementation* of those standard C functions may involve some sort of interface that's known to the debugger/simulator as

Re: [Mspgcc-users] msp430-elf-gcc upcoming release

* The only headers/linker scripts available are from GCC_RH_20131206.zip; memory.ld and peripherals.ld for each MCU need to be manually combined to get something binutils can process Hmmm... I was under the impression that there were toplevel chip-specific scripts that included the

Re: [Mspgcc-users] msp430-elf-gcc upcoming release

It uses the TI CIO interface. Interesting; is there any public documentation on how to use that? Not that I know of. An option to build MSP430 newlib with the standard system interface would be even better. I don't know of a standard interface. Each chip I've done has done something a

Re: [Mspgcc-users] msp430-elf-gcc upcoming release

I was surprised to see DJ's comment that there actually was no standard system interface; the standard interface I was referring to is the one documented at http://neptune.billgatliff.com/newlib.html The key to a successfully ported newlib is providing stubs that bridge the gap between the

Re: [Mspgcc-users] msp430-elf size optimizations - some notes and a patch

On a different note, i was wondering if anybody on the list have the same problem as me, using the TI pre-compiled binaries for the MSP430 (the RH port, downloaded from TI web site), the msp430-elf-gdb.exe , works Ok with 430 and 430X but using only small memory model for a 430X. If you

Re: [Mspgcc-users] msp430-elf size optimizations - some notes and a patch

OK, if it is /that/ much space then it's a completely different matter. I thought we were just talking about clearing the bss and setting the initialised data, which should just be a couple of short simple loops. Worst case startup is around 400 bytes, but once you start optimizing, you

Re: [Mspgcc-users] msp430-elf size optimizations - some notes and a patch

Even if you have the smallest mps430 with 512 bytes flash, it does not matter if your program is 24 bytes or 511 bytes - all that matters is that it fits in the chip you have. If the startup is more than 512 bytes, it matters a lot. If you only have 512 bytees of code space and you discover

Re: [Mspgcc-users] msp430-elf size optimizations - some notes and a patch

Er, that reminds me, I missed some stuff in the doc about removing Java support... sigh. I added this: Lastly, there's a GCC option -minrt that tells gcc to use a minimum runtime for programs that do not need static initializers or constructors (popular in C++ and Java). Note that this is

Re: [Mspgcc-users] msp430-elf size optimizations - some notes and a patch

Is it the intent to fully support C++ in this port, inclusive of static initializers and exceptions? If you have enough flash/ram, yes. We fully test C++ in our simulators, so if gcc/newlib support it in general, it should work for msp430 also. (Exclusive of features that require host

Re: [Mspgcc-users] msp430-elf size optimizations - some notes and a patch

Great news and thank you for the update, is it possible to throw somewhere the Windows binaries? I think it is time for fresh windows binaries, the last one was back in December. Sorry, I don't work for TI, so I can't make them do a release or say anything about their schedule or

[Mspgcc-users] msp430-elf size optimizations - some notes and a patch

I'm writing this document to collect some of the current/new knowledge on how to minimize the flash/rom size needed for MSP430 applications, using the new msp430-elf (FSF/Red Hat) tools. I'll keep a copy at http://people.redhat.com/~dj/msp430/size-optimizations.html This document has two

Re: [Mspgcc-users] How to tell the linker to place the particular function at the specified address?

In general (i.e. untested ;) you'd add a linker script snippet like this: section_TAO 0xC400 : { *(.myfuncsec_TAO) } Then tag your function with a section attribute: static void __interrupt __attribute__((section(.myfuncsec_TAO))) Timer0_A0_alter(void) { } The key here is that you can

Re: [Mspgcc-users] RFC: ATTENTION ALL PORTS/PACKAGES MAINTAINERS!

A clean distinction is that mspgcc traditionally used msp430-cmd while msp430 gcc uniformly uses msp430-elf-cmd for all toolchain commands. If that distinction were reflected in the package names, it might be very simple to have parallel installations. Also, it's useful to have parallel

Re: [Mspgcc-users] RedHat Toolchain for small chips

The typical case for tiny programs is that the startup/shutdown code, which normally has to be robust enough to handle all language extensions, is vastly bigger than the program itself. There are a couple of things you can manually do to trim out bits you know you don't need, like custom crt0.S

Re: [Mspgcc-users] MSP430 RedHat Toolchain: minor issues

Some quick answers where available... and probably not MSP430 specific, with -Os static inline functions() are not inlined, i also tried adding __attribute__((always_inline)) but it did not seem to have an effect in a quick test. Please try extern inline functions() instead. There was a

Re: [Mspgcc-users] MSP430 RedHat Toolchain Generating Invalid Calls

I ran the Makefile in your zip using the latest FSF builds and it... just worked :-P Which version of gcc are you using? I.e. msp430-elf-gcc -v ? -- Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid

Re: [Mspgcc-users] MSP430 RedHat Toolchain Generating Invalid Calls

The _47 implies it's trying to shift by 47 bits (not registers). However, the slll variant is for longs (32-bit) and the helpers only go up to 15 bits (after that, it's supposed to use the variable-count helper instead). Maybe that will help you get a sharable test case, because that's what I

Re: [Mspgcc-users] GCC MSP430

There are three multilibs that are built: 430 - the default so it doesn't have a subdir - is for all non-430X processors. 430x - for 430X series processors, but still using 16-bit pointers. 430x/large - for 430X series processors using 20-bit pointers. For each of those, newlib is built

Re: [Mspgcc-users] Unofficial Red Hat Port

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but this only applies when the initialisation involves a constructor function rather than just assignment of a fixed value. Correct. are all run before main() is called. These might add extra code space because the constructor calls can't be fully inlined

Re: [Mspgcc-users] Unofficial Red Hat Port

For small targets like this, it is common to compile C++ with -fno-rtti True, but even the static objects must be initialized code adds some runtime space/time cost. It's not much, but the smallest MSP430's don't have much rom/ram to spare.

Re: [Mspgcc-users] Unofficial Red Hat Port

Is c++ an officially supported aspect of the port? I'm going to conditionally say yes because, while I build and test C++, I know there are some language features of C I took advantage of to get far (20-bit) addressing, that C++ simply doesn't support. So I'm not sure how well C++ will work in

Re: [Mspgcc-users] Unofficial Red Hat Port

Just FYI, the port is now official as it's been approved and checked in to the FSF repository! http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2013-09/msg00107.html I have some follow-up patches that will get commited shortly too, though.

Re: [Mspgcc-users] Unofficial Red Hat Port

Okay I'll ask... Is there FORTRAN support? No! :-) (but it might work anyway, I haven't tested) Now on to my real question... how much real world testing has been done? Has the output been put onto real msp430 chips? I'm testing against our simulator (it's in the gdb repo). I've

Re: [Mspgcc-users] mspgcc Red Hat release

And now, look at official ARM arm-gcc building script: it builds gcc twice, it copy first copy of gcc somewhere, to remove later, it wants to find some linux-specific headers in process, etc, etc, etc. Also, it uses There are two parts to gcc: the compiler binaries, and the support

Re: [Mspgcc-users] mspgcc Red Hat release

Speaking as an FSF maintainer (sorry, can't divulge Red Hat secrets ;), to answer some of the technical questions... It's our intention that the GCC ABI be compatible with the TI ABI, at least, as best we can (If you discover an incompatibility, report it). We've been testing for cross-linking