1. Added: GCC_CR toolchain ID for LPC2368. (targets.py)
2. Modified: Startup codes for GCC_ARM and GCC_CR toolchain.
3. Verified: "ticker" and "basic" test program work well, so far.
(Fixed typo.)
1. Added: GCC_CR toolchain ID for LPC2368. (targets.py)
2. Modified: Startup codes for GCC_ARM and GCC_CR toolchain.
3. Verified: "ticker" and "basic" test program works well, so far.
I verified that the hang issue I was seeing when building and running
the mbed official networking tests with GCC_ARM was related to this
issue reported on the mbed forums:
http://mbed.org/forum/mbed/topic/3803/?page=1#comment-18934
If you are using the 4.7 2013q1 update of GCC_ARM or newer then it
will have a _sbrk() implementation which checks the new top of heap
pointer against the current thread SP, stack pointer.
See this GCC_ARM related thread for more information:
https://answers.launchpad.net/gcc-arm-embedded/+question/218972
When using RTX RTOS threads, the thread's stack pointer can easily
point to an address which is below the current top of heap so this
check will incorrectly fail the allocation.
I have added a _sbrk() implementation to the mbed SDK which checks the
heap pointer against the MSP instead of the current thread SP. I have
only enabled this for TOOLCHAIN_GCC_ARM as this is the only GCC based
toolchain that I am sure requires this.
A new hooks mechanism (hooks.py) allows various targets to customize
part(s) of the build process. This was implemented to allow generation of
custom binary images for the EA LPC4088 target, but it should be generic
enough to allow other such customizations in the future. For now, only the
'binary' step is hooked in toolchains/arm.py.
Peter's and my changes to LPC1768.ld ended up adding the same AHBSRAM0
and AHBSRAM1 section clauses to the script twice. I removed one copy.
I also pulled Peter's define of the ETHMEM_SECTION macro up into the
previous nested #if so that the preprocessor wouldn't spit out a
redefined macro warning.
I verified that building the code clean before and after these changes
still results in the same .bin file but now without warnings and/or
duplicate code.
The original script assigned memory ranges to USB_RAM and ETH_RAM but
it never placed any section data in those regions. I added clauses
towards the bottom of the script to place data that the programmer
has marked for the AHBSRAM0 and AHBSRAM1 sections into these regions
of RAM. Previously the data destined for these sections was being
placed in the lower 32K RAM bank and overflowing it at link time.
I also added a few Image$$ linker symbols to mimic those used by the
online compiler. I have had samples in the past which took advantage
of these to display static memory statistics for each SRAM region.
I also changed LENGTH=0x7F38 to LENGTH=(32K - 0xC8) to make it more
consistent with the sizing of the other regions in this script which
use human readable K sizing information. The 0xC8 subtraction reflects
the starting offset of 0xC8 for this region.
i2c_frequency() compares a uint32_t ref variable to the int hz
function parameter passed in by the caller. I forced this to be an
uint32_t comparison.
i2c_slave_write() declared i and count variables to be of type uint32_t
but used them as int type throughout the code (in comparisons and
returns) so I switched them to be of signed int type.
spi_frequency() contains a change similar to that made in
i2c_frequency().
This commit targets the KL25Z code, whereas previous ones targetted
similar issues in the LPC1768 and LPC11U24 mbed HAL code.
These changes were made to silence GCC warnings and fix potential bugs
where they would never be equal when the enumeration wasn't a 32-bit
type.
For example, pinmap.c used to contain this code:
if (pin == (uint32_t)NC) return;
I switched it to:
if (pin == (PinName)NC) return;
I wonder why this casting to uint32_t was done in the first place?
Maybe another supported compiler requires it?
This commit targets the LPC11U24 code, whereas a previous one
targetted similar issues in the LPC1768 mbed HAL code.
These changes were made to silence GCC warnings and fix potential bugs
where they would never be equal when the enumeration wasn't a 32-bit
type.
For example, pinmap.c used to contain this code:
if (pin == (uint32_t)NC) return;
I switched it to:
if (pin == (PinName)NC) return;
I wonder why this casting to uint32_t was done in the first place?
Maybe another supported compiler requires it?
The original code was:
if(LPC_CAN1->IER | LPC_CAN2->IER != 0) {
This would actually be interpreted as:
if(LPC_CAN1->IER | (LPC_CAN2->IER != 0)) {
I simplified it to:
if(LPC_CAN1->IER | LPC_CAN2->IER) {
With the comparison removed, the GCC warning no longer fires since the
user's intent is no longer unclear. However, the end result should be
the same.
These were done to silence GCC warnings and fix potential bugs where
they would never be equal when the enumeration wasn't a 32-bit type.
For example, common/pinmap_common.c used to contain this code:
if (pin == (uint32_t)NC)
I switched it to:
if (pin == (PinName)NC)
I wonder why this casting to uint32_t was done in the first place?
Maybe another supported compiler requires it?
- rename stdio.cpp to retarget.cpp, since it doesn't contain only stdio-related
code
- move __cxa_pure_virtual from exit.c to retarget.cpp where it belongs.
Don't set a clock higher than the one requested for the I2C and SPI interfaces,
even if this setting is the closest to the requested one. This was causing
some issues with the EEPROM test and possibly other issues with the SPI SD test.
dinau
Adam Green
Bogdan Marinescu
ytsuboi
Toyomasa Watarai
Bogdan Marinescu
pbrier
0xc0170
Bogdan Marinescu
Emilio Monti
Andreas Rebert
Matthew Else
Joris Aerts