Am 07.04.2018 um 18:31 schrieb Maarten Brock:
>> Am 07.04.2018 um 15:50 schrieb Maarten Brock:
>>
>>> I see in the stm8-large regression that you fixed it by loading the
>>> least
>>> significant word into x and the most significant byte into a and write
>>> those to the function pointer location
> Am 07.04.2018 um 18:31 schrieb Maarten Brock:
>>> Am 07.04.2018 um 15:50 schrieb Maarten Brock:
>>>
I see in the stm8-large regression that you fixed it by loading the
least
significant word into x and the most significant byte into a and write
those to the function pointer
Am 07.04.2018 um 18:31 schrieb Maarten Brock:
>> Am 07.04.2018 um 15:50 schrieb Maarten Brock:
>>
>>> I see in the stm8-large regression that you fixed it by loading the
>>> least
>>> significant word into x and the most significant byte into a and write
>>> those to the function pointer location
> Am 07.04.2018 um 15:50 schrieb Maarten Brock:
>
>> I see in the stm8-large regression that you fixed it by loading the
>> least
>> significant word into x and the most significant byte into a and write
>> those to the function pointer location as you need them. Is this an OK
>> solution or would
Am 07.04.2018 um 15:50 schrieb Maarten Brock:
> I see in the stm8-large regression that you fixed it by loading the least
> significant word into x and the most significant byte into a and write
> those to the function pointer location as you need them. Is this an OK
> solution or would you still
> Am 06.04.2018 um 14:12 schrieb Eric Rullens:
>> Dear Philipp,
>>
>> Apologies for bumping into this conversation (and thank you very much
>> for
>> all the work!), but I think the assembler does what it should do.
>>
>> Please consider the following:
>>
>> [â¦]
>>
>>
Dear Phillipp,
Yes, you are absolutely right: for relocatable symbols things go awry. When
attempting my previous tests on a relocatable symbol more issues can be
seen:
010050123 _test1:
124 ; test.c: 126: __endasm;
Am 06.04.2018 um 14:12 schrieb Eric Rullens:
> Dear Philipp,
>
> Apologies for bumping into this conversation (and thank you very much for
> all the work!), but I think the assembler does what it should do.
>
> Please consider the following:
>
> […]
>
> 124 ;
Dear Philipp,
Apologies for bumping into this conversation (and thank you very much for
all the work!), but I think the assembler does what it should do.
Please consider the following:
116 ; Assembler test (r10380): loading
0xhhmmll (high, mid, low) bytes into
I have to correct myself on the "special case" theory in the linker: when I
actually use the full msc51 code (as opposed to just setting the same flags)
in the assembler, it looks like the linker generates the right relocations
for 24 bit stm8 as well.
Eric
> -Oorspronkelijk bericht-
>
Dear Philipp and Maarten,
I was just checking and got this far: the assembler contains a special case
for mcs51 (I think ds390 is essentially the same thing). After making a
simple general change in the assembler, the rel files look ok, but the rst
file still is broken. So there probably is a
11 matches
Mail list logo
