Is there a reason why __CODE and __DATA aren't set to default values in
the linker and instead the values defined in z80/main.c get passed via
command line arguments when called via `bin/sdcc`?
--
Freundliche Grüße / Yours sincerely
Sebastian „Baŝto“ Riedel
__
On Wed, 22 Jul 2020, Basil Hussain wrote:
In ucSim, where or what defines how many simulated cycles each instruction
takes? Specifically, I am looking at the STM8 simulator.
Nowhere, and nothing defines that. Correct tick counting is not
implemented in uCsim (except s51). It counts 1 clock (t
Sebastian 'basxto' Riedel wrote on 2020-07-23 13:02:
Is there a reason why __CODE and __DATA aren't set to default values
in the linker and instead the values defined in z80/main.c get passed
via command line arguments when called via `bin/sdcc`?
What default values would you expect? The z80 do
On 23.07.20 14:35, Maarten Brock wrote:
Sebastian 'basxto' Riedel wrote on 2020-07-23 13:02:
Is there a reason why __CODE and __DATA aren't set to default values
in the linker and instead the values defined in z80/main.c get passed
via command line arguments when called via `bin/sdcc`?
What def
Sebastian 'basxto' Riedel wrote on 2020-07-23 15:02:
On 23.07.20 14:35, Maarten Brock wrote:
Sebastian 'basxto' Riedel wrote on 2020-07-23 13:02:
Is there a reason why __CODE and __DATA aren't set to default values
in the linker and instead the values defined in z80/main.c get passed
via comman
Nowhere, and nothing defines that. Correct tick counting is not
implemented in uCsim (except s51). It counts 1 clock (tick) for every
instruction which will be unreal especially when lot of jumps happen.
Oh, I don't expect ucSim to fully and exactly replicate STM8 behaviour,
including pipel
On Thu, 23 Jul 2020, Basil Hussain wrote:
One would only expect it to simulate the nominal number
of cycles for all instructions.
It needs some work to make it more realistic.
This is confusing. What is the difference between 'vclks' and 'clks', and why
are there two separate values?
"clks
It needs some work to make it more realistic.
Yes. I was looking at the source code just now (stm8.src/stm8.cc and
stm8.src/inst.cc) and it seems clock cycles are incremented by use of a
tick() function call. All instructions appear to be assumed as taking 1
cycle by default, with addition
