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 misstated my response ... we use OT(8) without linker code packing. If we need further savings, we then switch to using code packing.

    While I agree that this could cause errors, we always validate.

    Our problem is that our customers tend to add features until all available resources are consumed.

    OT(9) is only used as a last resort since it obscures the code and listings making it much more difficult to follow.

Reply
  • I misstated my response ... we use OT(8) without linker code packing. If we need further savings, we then switch to using code packing.

    While I agree that this could cause errors, we always validate.

    Our problem is that our customers tend to add features until all available resources are consumed.

    OT(9) is only used as a last resort since it obscures the code and listings making it much more difficult to follow.

Children
No data