Bug in Optimizer at CompareBlock?

1
2
3
Page 3 of 3

Merlin

Administrator

Gender:
Age: 25
Posts: 1419
Registered: 03 / 2005

Subject:

Re: Bug in Optimizer at CompareBlock?

· Posted: 20.11.2024 - 23:41 · #17

Hi Sandor.

It was reported to me that some DSC files that were wrong. When I looked at some other files I found that they had similar issues. Rather than change the files one by one I wrote a utility to update the files, but it seems that it has introduced some other issues.

If you find that any DSC files need replacing, please do so, but please let me have the corrected files and I will ensure that they are included in the next release. That will be a big help to the community.

Thank you

wsandor

Benutzer

Gender: n/a
Age: 53
Posts: 25
Registered: 07 / 2012

Subject:

Re: Bug in Optimizer at CompareBlock?

· Posted: 21.11.2024 - 08:30 · #18

Hi Merlin,

I think the old ones are better, but maybe not perfect. There are some fields that 's exact meaning I don't know for sure:
- [device] section UARTN=true (this is missing from the old one. Does it means that the uC has an UART?
- [memory] section pdataend difers old=255 new=95. I don't know exactly which area in the register file is treated as PDATA, so which is the correct value. (I guess that 95 is the good answer)
- and the indexing of the usart interrupt vectors. In the data sheets they are always 0,1... but in AVRCo they are -no index, 2..... So keeping the old values are more compatible with AVRCo' s naming system, and other dsc-s, however the 0,1.. corresponds to the data sheet more.
If you could help me in this I will make the dsc-s accordingly.

Best regards,

Sandor

wsandor

Benutzer

Gender: n/a
Age: 53
Posts: 25
Registered: 07 / 2012

Subject:

Re: Bug in Optimizer at CompareBlock?

· Posted: 21.11.2024 - 09:47 · #19

Hi Merlin,

I tried the new optimizer with an other project (uC mega128), but unfortunatly it seems that something went wrong in it. It is a quite complicated project, parts written in assembly. which display text on LED matrix displays. If I compile it with the 'old' optimezer or without optimization then it works fine, however with the new optimizer it behaves diferently - the output will be bad it displays breaked or invalid characters. I will try to track down the exact reason, but if you have any idea - that was changed beside the compmem, maybe it helps.. I attached the asm and dsm files.

Best regards,

Sandor

Attachments


Filename:	kistabla_RG_dsm.zip
Filesize:	401.72 KB
Title:
Download counter:	31

Merlin

Administrator

Gender:
Age: 25
Posts: 1419
Registered: 03 / 2005

Subject:

Re: Bug in Optimizer at CompareBlock?

· Posted: 21.11.2024 - 12:32 · #20

Hi Sandor

wrt DSC files.

I would need to look up what UARTN does, but if it is present in the new ones and absent in the old ones, I would include it. However, I will come back to you on that.

The pdataend is one of the main things that was wrong in general. For that (and pdatastart) you should take the new value. The size of pdata is 64 bytes (always - it is the bit addressable area of RAM). In the old version of the compiler this was hard wired as occupying positions 32-95 but in newer devices registers have moved to their own space and pdata occupies 0-63 on these devices. So I have removed the hard wiring and now rely on the DSC file and that will break many drivers if the value is wrong. The value should never be 255.

With regard to your display problem, if you can also let me have the old (working) asm file I should be able to isolate the issue pretty quickly.

Thank you for your support with dsc files. I appreciate is and will get back to you with the UARTN meaning.

Regards

Merlin

Administrator

Gender:
Age: 25
Posts: 1419
Registered: 03 / 2005

Subject:

Re: Bug in Optimizer at CompareBlock?

· Posted: 21.11.2024 - 16:03 · #21

Hi Sandor.

I think that I need to revise my advice re UARTN in dsc files. I have looked it up and it seems to refer to whether a particular naming convention is used for UARTS.

Therefore if it was not in the old DSC I think it should be removed from the new one.

Sorry for the confusion

Regards

wsandor

Benutzer

Gender: n/a
Age: 53
Posts: 25
Registered: 07 / 2012

Subject:

Re: Bug in Optimizer at CompareBlock?

· Posted: 22.11.2024 - 07:58 · #22

Dear Merlin,

Thanks for the answers for the dsc.

Regarding the optimizer error, the files ending with "good" are the old, working ones. They are also in the zip I sent yesterday.

Sandor

Merlin

Administrator

Gender:
Age: 25
Posts: 1419
Registered: 03 / 2005

Subject:

Re: Bug in Optimizer at CompareBlock?

· Posted: 22.11.2024 - 10:39 · #23

Ah I should have checked. Thank you Sandor.

Merlin

Administrator

Gender:
Age: 25
Posts: 1419
Registered: 03 / 2005

Subject:

Re: Bug in Optimizer at CompareBlock?

· Posted: 25.11.2024 - 10:58 · #24

@all

Here is fix for optimiser.

Attachments


Filename:	MerlinOptimiser.zip
Filesize:	1.13 MB
Title:
Download counter:	28

1
2
3
Page 3 of 3

Bug in Optimizer at CompareBlock?

Attachments

Attachments

Registered users in this topic