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

Disappointing optimisation...

Hi,

I'm doing a comparison between BL51 and Lx51 to determine the code space savings- I'm a bit suprised to see that for the same project, Lx51 yields a code reduction of only 0.6%- I've enabled the AJMP/ACALL setting, and altered the optimisation levels (speaking of which, under Lx51 raising the optimsation levels from 9 to the 'new' levels of 10/11 actually increases the code size)

Does anyone have any similar experience of this phenomena- or any suggestion as to what else I should try to get the touted 10-15% reductions available using LX51?

I'm only using the 'BANKAREA' LX51 controls...

Thanks

David

Parents
  • "I don't care where the optimisation takes place- If using LX51 provides me with two extra levels of optimisation (and a bigger hole in my pocket after buying PK51), I don't think it's unreasonable to expect an overall reduction in code size"

    I agree, although as noted elsewhere the extra two optimisation levels are at best of dubious value. The big saving comes with the code packing jump/call optimisation.

    "I can only assume that our projects are atypical..."

    Maybe - do you have a large amount of constant data or something?

Reply
  • "I don't care where the optimisation takes place- If using LX51 provides me with two extra levels of optimisation (and a bigger hole in my pocket after buying PK51), I don't think it's unreasonable to expect an overall reduction in code size"

    I agree, although as noted elsewhere the extra two optimisation levels are at best of dubious value. The big saving comes with the code packing jump/call optimisation.

    "I can only assume that our projects are atypical..."

    Maybe - do you have a large amount of constant data or something?

Children
No data