Re: [avr-gcc-list] New prosessor goes into stack violation!

[E. Weddington]

On 11 Jan 2005 at 12:37, Per Arnold Blåsmo wrote:

> That worked :-)
> I tried both as an option and changing in avr-gcc. I go for the last option.
>
> The code runs now and everything looks good.
> Maybe the patches to the binutils and avr-gcc should be submitted to the
> project. I cant submit the header file for the MCU without Atmel
> approving it, but the patches to binutils, avr-gcc and avr-libc should
> be OK to submit.

Any patches to the toolchain (binutils, gcc, avr-libc, etc.) should go into a 
patch tracker on the
avr-libc project.

I'm not quite sure how to handle getting permission from Atmel for adding the 
secureAVR
device to the toolchain.... Usually the header is very clear in showing the 
register layout, which
is a part of the datasheet under NDA.


>
> There also is a couple of sections that could be defined for the MCU. I
> believed that was done in the linker script, but maybe that can be done
> as option to the linker?
>

Let us know what works for you.


Eric