• State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 15 replies
  • Subscribers 22 subscribers
  • Views 2447 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related
How was your experience today?
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

Compiler problem while adding global variables

David Ilgener

Hi everybody,

i have detected some absurd behavior in my project.
In not determinated intervalls i have a repeating problem with my At89c51Re2 software.

Now i reduced the Problem to a minimum.

Anywhere in my code i add a simple global variable (like static UINT32 g_ParameterChecksum = 0;) and the following code triggered the impossible error.

static UINT8 g_DigitalByteValue = 0;

...

        g_DigitalByteValue = 0;
        if (g_DigitalByteValue != 0)
        {
                Debug_ErrorOutput("Compiler Error? @digout");
                Error_FatalError(ERROR_UNKOWN);
        }
...

when i removed the new variable it works well.

I am use code banking,funtion pointers, interupts and Uv3 (from command line).
Program Size: data=233.1 xdata=8183 const=112 code=91375
Maximum block depth: 8

i suggest that some addresses pointers are mixed up, but i does not know why.

Has somebody a hint or solution for this problem?

Thanks a lot,
David

Parents
  • 0 in reply to ImPer Westermark

    The variable are at the end of my xdata segment:

    START     STOP      LENGTH    ALIGN  RELOC    MEMORY CLASS   SEGMENT NAME
=========================================================================
* * * * * * * * * * *  X D A T A   M E M O R Y  * * * * * * * * * * * * *
[...]
002007H   002007H   000001H   BYTE   UNIT     XDATA          ?XD?DIGITALOUT
002008H   002008H   000001H   BYTE   UNIT     XDATA          ?XD?GETCHAR

    i cant see any overlapping with interrupt variables.

Reply
  • 0 in reply to ImPer Westermark

    The variable are at the end of my xdata segment:

    START     STOP      LENGTH    ALIGN  RELOC    MEMORY CLASS   SEGMENT NAME
=========================================================================
* * * * * * * * * * *  X D A T A   M E M O R Y  * * * * * * * * * * * * *
[...]
002007H   002007H   000001H   BYTE   UNIT     XDATA          ?XD?DIGITALOUT
002008H   002008H   000001H   BYTE   UNIT     XDATA          ?XD?GETCHAR

    i cant see any overlapping with interrupt variables.

Children
  • 0 in reply to David Ilgener

    0003 900000 R MOV DPTR,#g_DigitalByteValue

    I do not know. Is the AT89C51RE2 so advanced?

    what you are missing is that in startup.a51 you must enable the internal XRAM (refer to datasheet).

    what you should change is that you use the LARGE model, this slow down operation dramatically and increase memory use.

    BTW if you had used te SMALL model you code would have worked

    Erik

  • 0 in reply to ²erik malund

    Thanks for your advice,

    I chose LARGE as Model because of the code size criteria.
    If I use SMALL i should be relocate many variables and i don't know why i should do this.

    Wen i am enabling the on-chip XRam (in project properties), i get many address space overflow error L107 in xdata space from linker.

    Can you or somebody give me a hint to understand this problem furthermore?

    Thanks a lot,
    David

  • 0 in reply to David Ilgener

    I chose LARGE as Model because of the code size criteria.
    the 'model' has no influence on code size

    Wen i am enabling the on-chip XRam (in project properties)
    I do not, here have a '51 toolset here, does "enabling the on-chip XRam in project properties stick the needed code into startup.a51 ?

    try, instead to insert the needed SFR write at the very beginning of startup.a51.

    Erik

  • 0 in reply to ²erik malund

    Hello Erik,

    thanks for your reply.
    In my experience the change in project properties "Use On-chip XRAM" only transfer the information, so address overflow can be detected.

    That gaves me the opportunity to resize my Program Size: data=233.1 xdata=4553 const=120 code=93330

    The first mentioned error disappear, but another error replace it. I think there are some connection between them.

    I add some simple code or move it from another function and the controller does not return and hangs up or some intern variables became strange values.

    i have added the code as follows in startup.a51:

    AUXR    DATA    8EH               ; add SFR definition for AT89c51re2
...
STARTUP1:
        ORL AUXR,#1CH   ; added to enabled internal xram

    but it makes no difference.

    Thanks a lot,
    David

  • 0 in reply to David Ilgener

    Now I am realizing that there are some expectation gaps between me and the µVision IDE.

    I checked the allocation of my program data.

    In AT89C51RE2 there are 3 code bank and 1 common bank with each 32K code space.

    I ve checked the memory map and the see that the common area is filled until 00F4D3.

    00F4D3H   00F54AH   000078H   BYTE   UNIT     CONST

    I dont understand why this is working well or do I miss a point?

  • 0 in reply to David Ilgener

    I dont understand why this is working well or do I miss a point

    probably you have less than 64k code and no banking.

    In AT89C51RE2 there are 3 code bank and 1 common bank with each 32K code space.
    NO, In AT89C51RE2 there is 128k of code space that can be configured as "are 3 code bank and 1 common bank"

    Erik

  • 0 in reply to ²erik malund

    In my AT89C51RE2 there are 3 code bank and 1 common bank with each 32K code space configured as shown in www.atmel.com/.../doc7639.pdf .

    code size=70977
    const=120

    *** CODE BANK 1 ***
    008000H - 00B613H

    *** CODE BANK 2 ***
    008000H - 00AEAAH

    *** CODE BANK 3 ***
    008000H - 008AAFH

    *** COMMON AREA ***
    000000H - 00DBDDH

    When i am put more than 64 in common area the compiler detected an overflow otherwise not.

    David