[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [avr-libc-dev] Error when using large memory addresses
From: |
Paul Schlie |
Subject: |
Re: [avr-libc-dev] Error when using large memory addresses |
Date: |
Tue, 15 Feb 2005 13:16:56 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Microsoft-Entourage/11.1.0.040913 |
Unless I misunderstand (and may), there seems to be nothing to work around;
as RAMPZ does not affect RAM load/stores on any devices (I'm aware of), and
is correctly set as required when program memory is accessed; so why would
you want to add code which does nothing useful?
> From: gouy yann <address@hidden>
> Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 15:44:34 +0100 (CET)
> To: Per Arnold Blåsmo <address@hidden>, <address@hidden>
> Subject: Re: [avr-libc-dev] Error when using lagre memory addresses
>
> hello,
>
> I suspect you will ask to write a bug report for the problem not to be
> forgiven!
>
> regards.
>
> Yann
>
> --- Per Arnold Blåsmo <address@hidden> a écrit :
>> Hi,
>> During my work with adapting avg-gcc to a new processor (AT90SC3232CS) I
>> have discovered a problem regarding addressing that I think is not
>> working in the generated code.
>>
>> I would like some comments on this from some of you more expert than me
>> on this :-)
>>
>> Consider the following code:
>> ----
>> #include <avr/io.h>
>> #include <avr/pgmspace.h>
>>
>> #define FROMADDR 0x100000L
>> #define TOADDR1 (uint8_t *)0x200
>> #define TOADDR2 (uint8_t *)0x100
>>
>> int main(void)
>> {
>> uint8_t *p_to_addr1= TOADDR1;
>> uint8_t *p_to_addr2= TOADDR2;
>> uint32_t from_addr = FROMADDR;
>> uint8_t size = 255;
>>
>> while(size--){
>> *p_to_addr1++ = pgm_read_byte_far(from_addr++);
>> }
>> size=255;
>> *p_to_addr1 = TOADDR1;
>> while(size--){
>> *p_to_addr2++ = *p_to_addr1++;
>> }
>>
>> }
>> ----
>>
>> Compile for an ATmega128 it gives the following assembly:
>> (and yes I know it would not work in real life, but I try to show a
>> point her :-)
>>
>> ----
>> int main(void)
>> {
>> 62: cf ef ldi r28, 0xFF ; 255
>> 64: dc e0 ldi r29, 0x0C ; 12
>> 66: de bf out 0x3e, r29 ; 62
>> 68: cd bf out 0x3d, r28 ; 61
>> uint8_t *p_to_addr1= TOADDR1;
>> 6a: 00 e0 ldi r16, 0x00 ; 0
>> 6c: 12 e0 ldi r17, 0x02 ; 2
>> uint8_t *p_to_addr2= TOADDR2;
>> 6e: ee 24 eor r14, r14
>> 70: ff 24 eor r15, r15
>> 72: 68 94 set
>> 74: f0 f8 bld r15, 0
>> uint32_t from_addr = FROMADDR;
>> 76: 40 e0 ldi r20, 0x00 ; 0
>> 78: 50 e0 ldi r21, 0x00 ; 0
>> 7a: 60 e1 ldi r22, 0x10 ; 16
>> 7c: 70 e0 ldi r23, 0x00 ; 0
>> uint8_t size = 255;
>>
>> while(size--){
>> *p_to_addr1++ = pgm_read_byte_far(from_addr++);
>> 7e: ce ef ldi r28, 0xFE ; 254
>> 80: db 01 movw r26, r22
>> 82: ca 01 movw r24, r20
>> 84: 4f 5f subi r20, 0xFF ; 255
>> 86: 5f 4f sbci r21, 0xFF ; 255
>> 88: 6f 4f sbci r22, 0xFF ; 255
>> 8a: 7f 4f sbci r23, 0xFF ; 255
>> 8c: 98 01 movw r18, r16
>> 8e: 0f 5f subi r16, 0xFF ; 255
>> 90: 1f 4f sbci r17, 0xFF ; 255
>> 92: ab bf out 0x3b, r26 ; 59 <= 0x3b = RAMPZ set
>> to 0x10
>> 94: fc 01 movw r30, r24
>> 96: 87 91 elpm r24, Z+
>> 98: f9 01 movw r30, r18
>> 9a: 80 83 st Z, r24 <= this one should
>> store to 0x0200 but stores to 0x100200 instead
>> 9c: c1 50 subi r28, 0x01 ; 1
>> 9e: 80 f7 brcc .-32 ; 0x80
>> }
>> size=255;
>> *p_to_addr1 = TOADDR1;
>> a0: f8 01 movw r30, r16
>> a2: 10 82 st Z, r1
>> while(size--){
>> *p_to_addr2++ = *p_to_addr1++;
>> a4: ce ef ldi r28, 0xFE ; 254
>> a6: f8 01 movw r30, r16
>> a8: 81 91 ld r24, Z+ <= this one should
>> load from 0x0200 but loads from 0x100200
>> aa: 8f 01 movw r16, r30
>> ac: f7 01 movw r30, r14
>> ae: 81 93 st Z+, r24 <= this one should
>> store in 0x0100 but stores in 0x100100
>> b0: 7f 01 movw r14, r30
>> b2: c1 50 subi r28, 0x01 ; 1
>> b4: c0 f7 brcc .-16 ; 0xa6
>> }
>>
>> }
>>
>> -----------
>>
>> This code will not work as intended.
>>
>> As you can see I use a 'from address' that is 24 bit put into a long (32
>> bit).
>> To read from this address I use 'pgm_read_byte_far'. 'pgm_read_byte_far'
>> correctly uses
>> RAMPZ (0x3b) to address the memory location ((RAMPZ:Z) = 0x100000).
>>
>> The problem is that RAMPZ does not get reset after used. That clutters
>> the use of Z later in the code.
>>
>> My solution to this so far has been to include a line likethis:
>>
>> __asm__ volatile ("out %0, 0x0" : : "I" (_SFR_IO_ADDR(RAMPZ)));
>> // Hack to reset RAMPZ after it is used
>>
>> Anyone like to comment on this or/and suggest another work-around?
>>
>> Per A.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> AVR-libc-dev mailing list
>> address@hidden
>> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-libc-dev
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Découvrez le nouveau Yahoo! Mail : 250 Mo d'espace de stockage pour vos mails
> !
> Créez votre Yahoo! Mail sur http://fr.mail.yahoo.com/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AVR-libc-dev mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-libc-dev