My program runs fine on uvision simulation (nothing to do with Silab peripherials). Same program shows (long multiplied by long) calling C:0000 My tool integration shows both, uvision and Silab are using same programs. Silabl people could not help.
What I mean is code compiled in Uvision gives proper disassembly code. But Compiled under Silab IDE disassembly code is not proper: eg. csource: unsigned long i,j,k; j=0x1234; k=8760; i=j*k; Last statement results in Uvision : LCALL ?C?SLDIV but in silab disassembly is: LCALL 0000 and silab code resets processor when Lcall 0000 executed.
Well, that's clearly an Si Labs problem - so you'll have to ask Si Labs! What compiler is the SiLabs IDE using? Are you sure you are looking at the final, linked code from Si Labs? Do you get an errors/warnings from the SiLabs tools?
"i=j*k; Last statement results in Uvision : LCALL ?C?SLDIV" Something's not right there!
I think it's linker problem. Code is as if its still considering "?C?SLDIV" as extern and not linked. I am using same uvision exe files in IDE. But I am not sure about switches of linker or somthing to do with path??? Can somebody suggest me how to check liner options in obth environment?
"Code is as if its still considering "?C?SLDIV" as extern and not linked." Why would a library division routine be called when you are doing a multiplication?
"Can somebody suggest me how to check liner options in obth environment?" For the Si Labs stuff, that "somebody" would be Si Labs, surely?!
My mistake. unsigned long i,j,k; j=0x1234; k=8760; i=j/k; Last statement results in Uvision : LCALL ?C?SLDIV but in silab disassembly is: LCALL 0000 Silab goes on suggesting to refer documents, which I have already read. May be I am not so good at understanding them. So I thought of asking in this forum where more relevent people can help.
Yes I know it should be Silab. But I am using Keil Tools. SO I thought people using Keil will know it better and will be willing to help.
"But I am using Keil Tools. SO I thought people using Keil will know it better and will be willing to help." Now you've lost me! I thought you said it worked with the Keil tools (uVision), but not SiLabs??
Tools do not belong to silab. Only IDE belongs to silabb. But tools used under silab IDE is from Keil. When you configure keil tools in keil environment, its more user friendly, but silab environment is not. So I am in trouble. If a person knows Keil well and looks in silab environment, he can understand faster.
"When you configure keil tools in keil environment, its more user friendly, but silab environment is not." So, in summary: * Keil IDE works, Si Labs doesn't; * Keil IDE is nice, Si Labs isn't. The answer seems very simple to me: use the Keil IDE, throw away the Si Labs! Or am I still missing something?
Have you used Silab chips? If yes, you also will know that Keil simulator do not support all Silab processor peripherial. You have to use Silab IDE and integrate Uvision tools and JTAG debugging tools. I think I was here to get help from a bit more experianced person. I am running out of time.