This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

C51 v7.20 WinXP Exception

We have a new machine running a new version of the compiler that's having a problem. It's Cx51 v7.20, run from uVision, on top of WinXp Media Center Edition (hey, it was there), plus Cygwin.

When the compiler runs, a couple of "send problem report to Microsoft" exception dialogs pop up when compilation reaches a particular couple of files. It's always the same two files, which may be just a matter of when they're reached in the compilation process, or perhaps something about the files themselves.

There's nothing wrong with the project or these particular files. We have two other machines (running XP Pro pre- and post-SP2 and C51 v7.05 / v7.09) that work fine on exactly the same input (project files and source).

Sound familiar to anyone? Any suggestions on what might be going wrong?

Parents
  • I emailed Brian a new file earlier today. So, for those of you that like to play along at home:

    #include <stdlib.h>
    #include <stdio.h>
    
    #define	MY_BASE				0xf000
    #define MyAddress(offset)	(MY_BASE + (offset << 3))
    #define PortTable(offset)	((volatile unsigned int *) MyAddress(offset))
    #define PortVal				PortTable(0xbcd)
    
    void cmd (int argc, const char * const argv[])
    {
    	unsigned int ui;
    
    	if (argc > 3)
    	{
    		ui = strtoul (argv[3], NULL, 0);
    
    		ui = PortVal + 1;
    //		ui = ((volatile unsigned int *) (0xf000 + (0xbcd << 3)));
    	}
    }
    
    void main (void)
    	{
    	cmd (2, NULL);
    	for (;;);
    	}
    
    

    There. More like a real program now, though of course still pointless.

    The point, of course, is to have a minimalist example that produces the problem (whether it does anything useful or not). This code is a stripped and santized version of the real thing, a eidolon of its original form devoid of real meaning and purpose in life.

    The "PortVal + 1" line causes the 7.20 compiler to access memory out of bounds (Windows exception 0xc0000005). The commented line, where the macros have been expanded by hand, does not cause a crash. This makes me suspect the preprocessor. 7.05 will compile either version.

    I didn't try to get the example to link. Among other things, it's missing an L51_BANK and bank switching is enabled in the project file.

    My coworker (who actually is the one experiencing the problem) mentioned that removing the #include's will cause the compiler to successfully complete, but I haven't tried that myself.

Reply
  • I emailed Brian a new file earlier today. So, for those of you that like to play along at home:

    #include <stdlib.h>
    #include <stdio.h>
    
    #define	MY_BASE				0xf000
    #define MyAddress(offset)	(MY_BASE + (offset << 3))
    #define PortTable(offset)	((volatile unsigned int *) MyAddress(offset))
    #define PortVal				PortTable(0xbcd)
    
    void cmd (int argc, const char * const argv[])
    {
    	unsigned int ui;
    
    	if (argc > 3)
    	{
    		ui = strtoul (argv[3], NULL, 0);
    
    		ui = PortVal + 1;
    //		ui = ((volatile unsigned int *) (0xf000 + (0xbcd << 3)));
    	}
    }
    
    void main (void)
    	{
    	cmd (2, NULL);
    	for (;;);
    	}
    
    

    There. More like a real program now, though of course still pointless.

    The point, of course, is to have a minimalist example that produces the problem (whether it does anything useful or not). This code is a stripped and santized version of the real thing, a eidolon of its original form devoid of real meaning and purpose in life.

    The "PortVal + 1" line causes the 7.20 compiler to access memory out of bounds (Windows exception 0xc0000005). The commented line, where the macros have been expanded by hand, does not cause a crash. This makes me suspect the preprocessor. 7.05 will compile either version.

    I didn't try to get the example to link. Among other things, it's missing an L51_BANK and bank switching is enabled in the project file.

    My coworker (who actually is the one experiencing the problem) mentioned that removing the #include's will cause the compiler to successfully complete, but I haven't tried that myself.

Children