Hello Mr Baxter.

I joined this group because I use the uC and I had some questions,
which, before I asked the questions I failed to monitor the TYPE of
forum this was.

Well... silly me, I got reamed by the KNOW-IT-ALLs so I stopped asking
questions.

By the way, it is a very sexist forum, a female(I could tell by her
name) was helped TREMENDUOUSLY with what I thought was a similar type
question to what I had posed originally.

Me and 2 other people have created a NON-COCKY, with friendly attitude
forum, and you are welcome to join it.

All we do is share experiences, and of course answer questions if we
know the answer, or suggest solutions if we don't know it.

Hope to hear back from you,

________________________________

From: m... [mailto:m...] On Behalf
Of baxtercodeworks
Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2010 10:35 AM
To: m...
Subject: [lpc2000] FW: [msp430] Re: Buffer Problem

My name is LeRoy Baxter. I own Baxter Codeworks (www.baxcode.com) and
DataGet (www.dataget.com).

I have nothing to do with Rowley or Paul Curtis other than this forum.

I think you are insane and crap like this does not belong in this forum.

--- In m... ,
"Microbit_AthlonIIX4" wrote:
>
> Hi Backstabber - oops - Baxter... whatever..
> Wow, you are a psychic, Mr Simon (65).
> Paul Curtis decides to raise the stakes.... and the mysterious Simon
> "somewhere"
> wakes up within 5 mins (asynchronously) and decides that
"Baxtercodeworks"
> with 35 years of experience feels that Rowley Associates in UK REAL
TIME has
> been wronged by.
>

Beginning Microcontrollers with the MSP430

You're rambling like a madman. And Whois will tell you who owns the domains indicated. I have no obligation to personally prove anything to you.

Now go take your meds

--- In m..., "Microbit_AthlonIIX4" wrote:
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: m... [mailto:m...] On Behalf Of
> baxtercodeworks
> Sent: Thursday, 9 December 2010 2:35 AM
> To: m...
> Subject: [lpc2000] FW: [msp430] Re: Buffer Problem
>
> My name is LeRoy Baxter. I own Baxter Codeworks (www.baxcode.com) and
> DataGet (www.dataget.com).
>
> I have nothing to do with Rowley or Paul Curtis other than this forum.
>
> I think you are insane and crap like this does not belong in this forum.
>
> Dear Mr. Baxter,
>
> Ok, I didn't say you weren't ?
> But thank for your advice - Mr LeRoy Baxter.
>
> Would you then please - since you assert this publicly - reciprocate and
> produce proof that the owner of your URL is NOT Paul Curtis at Rowley
> Associates ?
>
> I look forward to that advice, because I've got some work ahead in returning
> the "mistaken" and unsolicited Emails I've been spammed with - a MASSIVE
> AMOUNT of mail by a "unknown entity" called Paul Curtis of Rowley Associates
> blind copying me for several years now on the most slanderous statements
> about many, many people and corporations without their consent. Or there was
> an electronic "glitch".
>
> You see Mr Baxter,
> Confidentiality law has it that I should return those unsolicited or
> mistaken messages
> else, those corporations stand the risk of losing their patents, trade
> marks, secrets etc etc by a "mistaken" leak.
> My concern is now for those entities, to attempt to avoid the loss of all
> their IP - since it has become public domain by your public action.
>
> Your logic assertion is a case of reductio ad absurdum (by which who you
> claim you ARE NOT (never mind who you are) - now conversely you have the
> burden of proof to convince me that the unknown and UNSOLICITED emails are
> not spam - after all.
>
> (Funny how what ... 5 ? by now "strangers" have all decided to just jump on
> Yahoo@ and have a paranormal conviction of all convincing me that they're
> who they are ... I didn't say they werent' :-)
>
> I just wrote that you ALSO are Paul Curtis.
>
> Obviously, I am mistaken and will proceed in lieue of said burden.
>
> B rgds
> Kris
> --- In m..., "Microbit_AthlonIIX4" wrote:
> >
> > Hi Backstabber - oops - Baxter... whatever..
> > Wow, you are a psychic, Mr Simon (65).
> > Paul Curtis decides to raise the stakes.... and the mysterious Simon
> > "somewhere"
> > wakes up within 5 mins (asynchronously) and decides that "Baxtercodeworks"
> > with 35 years of experience feels that Rowley Associates in UK REAL TIME
> has
> > been wronged by.
> >

-----Original Message-----
From: m... [mailto:m...] On Behalf Of
baxtercodeworks
Sent: Thursday, 9 December 2010 2:35 AM
To: m...
Subject: [lpc2000] FW: [msp430] Re: Buffer Problem

My name is LeRoy Baxter. I own Baxter Codeworks (www.baxcode.com) and
DataGet (www.dataget.com).

I have nothing to do with Rowley or Paul Curtis other than this forum.

I think you are insane and crap like this does not belong in this forum.

Dear Mr. Baxter,

Ok, I didn't say you weren't ?
But thank for your advice - Mr LeRoy Baxter.

Would you then please - since you assert this publicly - reciprocate and
produce proof that the owner of your URL is NOT Paul Curtis at Rowley
Associates ?

I look forward to that advice, because I've got some work ahead in returning
the "mistaken" and unsolicited Emails I've been spammed with - a MASSIVE
AMOUNT of mail by a "unknown entity" called Paul Curtis of Rowley Associates
blind copying me for several years now on the most slanderous statements
about many, many people and corporations without their consent. Or there was
an electronic "glitch".

You see Mr Baxter,
Confidentiality law has it that I should return those unsolicited or
mistaken messages
else, those corporations stand the risk of losing their patents, trade
marks, secrets etc etc by a "mistaken" leak.
My concern is now for those entities, to attempt to avoid the loss of all
their IP - since it has become public domain by your public action.

Your logic assertion is a case of reductio ad absurdum (by which who you
claim you ARE NOT (never mind who you are) - now conversely you have the
burden of proof to convince me that the unknown and UNSOLICITED emails are
not spam - after all.

(Funny how what ... 5 ? by now "strangers" have all decided to just jump on
Yahoo@ and have a paranormal conviction of all convincing me that they're
who they are ... I didn't say they werent' :-)

I just wrote that you ALSO are Paul Curtis.

Obviously, I am mistaken and will proceed in lieue of said burden.

B rgds
Kris

--- In m..., "Microbit_AthlonIIX4" wrote:
>
> Hi Backstabber - oops - Baxter... whatever..
> Wow, you are a psychic, Mr Simon (65).
> Paul Curtis decides to raise the stakes.... and the mysterious Simon
> "somewhere"
> wakes up within 5 mins (asynchronously) and decides that "Baxtercodeworks"
> with 35 years of experience feels that Rowley Associates in UK REAL TIME
has
> been wronged by.
>

My name is LeRoy Baxter. I own Baxter Codeworks (www.baxcode.com) and DataGet (www.dataget.com).

I have nothing to do with Rowley or Paul Curtis other than this forum.

I think you are insane and crap like this does not belong in this forum.
--- In m..., "Microbit_AthlonIIX4" wrote:
>
> Hi Backstabber - oops - Baxter... whatever..
> Wow, you are a psychic, Mr Simon (65).
> Paul Curtis decides to raise the stakes.... and the mysterious Simon
> "somewhere"
> wakes up within 5 mins (asynchronously) and decides that "Baxtercodeworks"
> with 35 years of experience feels that Rowley Associates in UK REAL TIME has
> been wronged by.
>

Hi Backstabber - oops - Baxter... whatever..
Wow, you are a psychic, Mr Simon (65).
Paul Curtis decides to raise the stakes.... and the mysterious Simon
"somewhere"
wakes up within 5 mins (asynchronously) and decides that "Baxtercodeworks"
with 35 years of experience feels that Rowley Associates in UK REAL TIME has
been wronged by.

Any judge in a court would piss himself laughing.... :-)

All other members :
I apologise for the interfence.
I've been exploited (well deceived, tp put it mildly) for nearly 8 years by
Rowley Associates - which caused me recently to lose my newly acquired
Senior Firmware Engineer position....... by using Rowley associates as a
reference - and respecting their "copyrights" by diplomatically asking my
Manager what to do (I have B&W proof of everything)
(Some - 2 I think - of my friends all around the world whom I've acquired
through these groups and stay in touch with, because we HELP EACH OTHER,
knew about this. It was a confidential and private matter.

(which Paul Curtis sabotaged for further wealth, beyond his deception by
fabricating "innocent newbie" questions....... and when members help... all
he does is lament and whinge about how he can't "work around" all these IAR
"nasties".

More lamenting..... Leon Heller's contract work was (unsolicited by me !!!!)
WHINGED about (not to mention Paul's ramblings to me in Email that TI are
pricks, Mark Buccini etc etc.... I have HARD evidence of this..... you know
over what ?
TI had the "gaul" to develop CCE "behind his back" (IOW 2% less wealth).

Mark, I think you know very well what I'm talking about here. HONEST TRUTH :
I don't even know who you are..... sincerely. Paul always bragged how he had
everyone at TI Freising "dancing to his tune".
Nowadays "he doesn't need TI anymore" - ARM is a successs now for Rowley.
(which is a rationalization for : How dare TI deny me of 2% of my wealth.

People I know on/through here, many friends here.

All I did tonight was pose (UNDER MY OWN NAME and IDENTITY and EMAIL address
as a "newbie" (I haven't been active on LPC2K for a few years, I helped a
"newbie" as best as I "could".
Tim corrected me - I knew this was going to be an irresistible feast for
Paul Curtis' MASSIVE ego and greed. "Baxtercode works'" demeaning,
supercilious and condescending post and attack at my character ("I'm
ranting").
Before I gently and diplomatically reassured Tim Mitchell I had no mal
intentions whatsoever (from the community's AND the OP's point of view IOW,
for the prosper of everyone)....... "Baxtercodeworks" had yet again arisen
as a "65 year old" and had composed a sharp and razor blade, nasty,
condescending and demeaning post directed at me.

People, read posts by "baxtercodeworks" on MSP430..... see a pattern ???
All I did was prick Paul's alter-ego (created out of greed) and he did
himself in.
If Paul keeps tantrums... I will take it to the next level and start
(privately!!!!)
forwarding all the greedy nonsense he's been "bloating" my Inbox with.
It's all archived & hard evidence.

Again, sorry everyone. It was anticipated that Paul would apologise - while
allowed to remain "Simon Baxter" to me. THAT"S all I ever wanted.
I got a reply within 5 mins to my last, last, last warning, and he still
could not divorce his ego and his alter-ego. He bit, and tumbled.
I gave him every chance for 2 days now to (PRIVATELY) come clean.
Nada.... not even that.
Best regards,
Kris

-----Original Message-----
From: l... [mailto:l...] On Behalf Of
simonb65
Sent: Thursday, 9 December 2010 12:55 AM
To: l...
Subject: [lpc2000] FW: [msp430] Re: Buffer Problem

haha, Mr Kris De Vos (48) of Melbourne!

You are a complete, self indulgent, dick head!

I'm, not even a member of the MSP430 group, you can't even use Google
properly, haha.

Credentials ... I have over 35 years hardware, software, embedded,
mainframe, military, commercial, aviation, automotive, network and
leadership experience. I know when someone has made themselves look a
complete fool! and that's YOU right now, so take a leaf out of your own
limited vocabulary and Shoooooooooooooooo, x

You DO need to grow up and get a life.

Kind Regards,
Simon.

--- In l..., "Microbit_AthlonIIX4" wrote:
>
> Simon-said-he's smart- but he's a moron :
>
>
>
> * Tip: Get you head out of your backside and put your 'story'
writing
> skills into writing a fiction novel!
>
> * You obviously can't supply any real technical substance > on here!
>
>
>
> Really, OK - I warned not to test me - OK, next step (this your OWN doing
> Paul Curtis, I gave you a too many chances)
>
>
>
> Hi Leon (Heller),
>
>
>
> Have you ever wondered what Paul Curtis thought of your contract work ?
>
> At this stage - I'll send it directly to you in near future.
>
> When you see the context, it's up to you what you decide to do.
>
> I'm trying to be gentle, but Paul isn't particularly nice about you.. To
say
> the least.
>
> (Please note Leon that I NEVER - EVER asked anything about all the poison
he
> spits at you.
>
> Unlike Simon said below (aka Paul), I send warm Emails and try - as best
as
> I can - to "drop a line" here & there on occasion.
>
>
>
> Ok, now you - Simon-said :
>
>
>
> I had a quick glance, and found a *massive* amount of "seemingly" dumb
> questions by our Sharp & fast
>
> resident expert : Simon-baxter !!!!... (forwarded at the end)
>
>
>
> Stay tuned - this is rich guys - you're gonna love it.
>
>
>
> Interestingly, same said Simon (pun intended) "BLOATS his Inbox" on MSP430
> Yahoo group (I'll leave it there for now)
>
> ... and you guessed it.. They're all CATEGORICAL "dumb" questions ? no
> siree... they're wittingly, cunningly and without mercy,
>
> designed to "slander" . "legally". you guessed it again.. IAR !!!!!!!!!!
>
>
>
> Come on Paul,
>
> Give it a rest - for Christ's sake.
>
>
>
> For the record, I'm also fwding this (back) to the MSP430 and SAM9 group.
>
> Paul, keep escalating, and my next step is start sending *all* your poison
> to dozens and dozens of parties involved.
>
> I don't know about others, but I'm sick of all the deceipt (which again,
for
> the record, I never solicited, au contraire)
>
> You've woven for yourself for years now.
>
> I've trusted you for 8 years, and now you have betrayed my trust for the
> LAST time.
>
> I WARNED you several times PRIVATELY to back off.. But nooooooo
>
>
>
> The almighty Paul Curtis is NEVER, NEVER wrong .. Now is he ????
>
> I wonder how many members on all these groups (not to mention RAL clients)
> are SICK to DEATH of being treated like shit
>
> as a customer.
>
>
>
> To quote the Bible (seems applicable with all this 6666 talk :-)
>
>
>
> "Show me a Liar and I'll show you a thief".
>
>
>
> Oh, Simon by the way, talking about fiction, did you actually know that
Mark
> Twain's name was actually Samuel Clements (or some such)
>
> and that he was one of the closest friends of Nikolai Tesla...
>
>
>
>
>
> _____
>
> From: m... [mailto:m...] On Behalf Of
> baxtercodeworks
> Sent: Friday, 3 December 2010 7:30 AM
> To: m...
> Subject: [msp430] Re: Buffer Problem
>
>
>
>
>
> I've got a similar program that runs on the MSP430F1121a - which has only
> 128 bytes ram, and it can handle a slightly larger buffer. I've tried
> eliminating variables (consts, statics, locals, etc.) sometimes gaining a
> little, but mostly without gaining anything.
>
> I do have a command table that is currently const, that could possibly go
> into Flash memory, but I'm unsure how to do that given that I'm already
> putting some data there using '__root const ... '.
>
> --- In m... ,
"Hayashi,
> Steve" wrote:
> >
> > Looking at your data types and looking at the specs for the F122, I
don't
> think you can make the buffer much larger than you have it. The processor
> only has 256 bytes of RAM and those two buffers occupy half of it.
> >
> > In short, you've run out of RAM. A google search on DATA16_Z shows quite
a
> number of people having similar problems as you.
> >
> > -Steve
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: m...
> [mailto:m... ] On
Behalf
> Of baxtercodeworks
> > Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2010 1:05 PM
> > To: m...
> > Subject: [msp430] Buffer Problem
> >
> > Background:
> > - using MSP430F122
> > - using IAR kickstart
> >
> > I'm trying to implement a circular buffer somewhat similar to IAR
appnote
> 430-03. However my buffer needs to be substantially larger. Even though I
> have plenty of space (program is about 3.5K), the IAR compiler balks with
> message:
> > ----------------
> > Error[e16]: Segment CSTACK (size: 0x50 align: 0x1) is too long for
segment
> definition. At least 0x13 more bytes needed. The problem occurred while
> processing the segment placement command
> > "-Z(DATA)CSTACK+_STACK_SIZE#", where at the moment of placement the
> available memory ranges were "CODE:2C3-300"
> > Reserved ranges relevant to this placement:
> > CODE:200-203 DATA16_I
> > CODE:204-2C2 DATA16_Z
> > -------------
> >
> > My buffers are declared at top of file:
> >
> > unsigned char queueType[64];
> > unsigned char queueData[64];
> >
> > Anyone know how I can make these buffers larger?
> >
> > TIA.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

> >
> >

Kris,

> Simon-said-he's smart- but he's a moron :
> Unlike Simon said below (aka Paul), I send warm Emails and try - as
> best as I can - to "drop a line" here & there on occasion.

I do not happen to be Simon Baxter and I have nothing in common with
baxtercodeworks.com.

> Stay tuned - this is rich guys - you're gonna love it.

This is pure tragedy.

> Interestingly, same said Simon (pun intended) "BLOATS his Inbox" on
> MSP430 Yahoo group (I'll leave it there for now)
> ... and you guessed it.. They're all CATEGORICAL "dumb" questions ? no
> siree... they're wittingly, cunningly and without mercy,
> designed to "slander" . "legally". you guessed it again.. IAR
> !!!!!!!!!!

You're accusing me of using a pseudonym designed to slander IAR?

That's one hell of an accusation.

I hope you can back that up with proof. Where is it?

> I've trusted you for 8 years, and now you have betrayed my trust for
> the LAST time. I WARNED you several times PRIVATELY to back off.. But
nooooooo

Unfortunately, you seemed to think I have hidden behind a pseudonym to
support myself. No, I can categorically state I have not.
> The almighty Paul Curtis is NEVER, NEVER wrong .. Now is he ????
> I wonder how many members on all these groups (not to mention RAL
> clients) are SICK to DEATH of being treated like shit
> as a customer.

Tim and Simon can speak for themselves; I do not speak for them, or request
they speak on my behalf.

> To quote the Bible (seems applicable with all this 6666 talk :-)
> "Show me a Liar and I'll show you a thief".
> Oh, Simon by the way, talking about fiction, did you actually know that
> Mark Twain's name was actually Samuel Clements (or some such)

If you are alluding to the fact that I have a pseudonym as Simon Baxter and
something to do with baxtercodeworks, you're tragically mistaken.

--
Paul Curtis, Rowley Associates Ltd http://www.rowley.co.uk
SolderCore arriving Winter 2010! http://www.soldercore.com

Simon-said-he's smart- but he's a moron :

* Tip: Get you head out of your backside and put your 'story' writing
skills into writing a fiction novel!

* You obviously can't supply any real technical substance > on here!

Really, OK - I warned not to test me - OK, next step (this your OWN doing
Paul Curtis, I gave you a too many chances)

Hi Leon (Heller),

Have you ever wondered what Paul Curtis thought of your contract work ?

At this stage - I'll send it directly to you in near future.

When you see the context, it's up to you what you decide to do.

I'm trying to be gentle, but Paul isn't particularly nice about you.. To say
the least.

(Please note Leon that I NEVER - EVER asked anything about all the poison he
spits at you.

Unlike Simon said below (aka Paul), I send warm Emails and try - as best as
I can - to "drop a line" here & there on occasion.

Ok, now you - Simon-said :

I had a quick glance, and found a *massive* amount of "seemingly" dumb
questions by our Sharp & fast

resident expert : Simon-baxter !!!!... (forwarded at the end)

Stay tuned - this is rich guys - you're gonna love it.

Interestingly, same said Simon (pun intended) "BLOATS his Inbox" on MSP430
Yahoo group (I'll leave it there for now)

... and you guessed it.. They're all CATEGORICAL "dumb" questions ? no
siree... they're wittingly, cunningly and without mercy,

designed to "slander" . "legally". you guessed it again.. IAR !!!!!!!!!!

Come on Paul,

Give it a rest - for Christ's sake.

For the record, I'm also fwding this (back) to the MSP430 and SAM9 group.

Paul, keep escalating, and my next step is start sending *all* your poison
to dozens and dozens of parties involved.

I don't know about others, but I'm sick of all the deceipt (which again, for
the record, I never solicited, au contraire)

You've woven for yourself for years now.

I've trusted you for 8 years, and now you have betrayed my trust for the
LAST time.

I WARNED you several times PRIVATELY to back off.. But nooooooo

The almighty Paul Curtis is NEVER, NEVER wrong .. Now is he ????

I wonder how many members on all these groups (not to mention RAL clients)
are SICK to DEATH of being treated like shit

as a customer.

To quote the Bible (seems applicable with all this 6666 talk :-)

"Show me a Liar and I'll show you a thief".

Oh, Simon by the way, talking about fiction, did you actually know that Mark
Twain's name was actually Samuel Clements (or some such)

and that he was one of the closest friends of Nikolai Tesla...

_____

From: m... [mailto:m...] On Behalf Of
baxtercodeworks
Sent: Friday, 3 December 2010 7:30 AM
To: m...
Subject: [msp430] Re: Buffer Problem

I've got a similar program that runs on the MSP430F1121a - which has only
128 bytes ram, and it can handle a slightly larger buffer. I've tried
eliminating variables (consts, statics, locals, etc.) sometimes gaining a
little, but mostly without gaining anything.

I do have a command table that is currently const, that could possibly go
into Flash memory, but I'm unsure how to do that given that I'm already
putting some data there using '__root const ... '.

--- In m... , "Hayashi,
Steve" wrote:
>
> Looking at your data types and looking at the specs for the F122, I don't
think you can make the buffer much larger than you have it. The processor
only has 256 bytes of RAM and those two buffers occupy half of it.
>
> In short, you've run out of RAM. A google search on DATA16_Z shows quite a
number of people having similar problems as you.
>
> -Steve
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: m...
[mailto:m... ] On Behalf
Of baxtercodeworks
> Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2010 1:05 PM
> To: m...
> Subject: [msp430] Buffer Problem
>
> Background:
> - using MSP430F122
> - using IAR kickstart
>
> I'm trying to implement a circular buffer somewhat similar to IAR appnote
430-03. However my buffer needs to be substantially larger. Even though I
have plenty of space (program is about 3.5K), the IAR compiler balks with
message:
> ----------------
> Error[e16]: Segment CSTACK (size: 0x50 align: 0x1) is too long for segment
definition. At least 0x13 more bytes needed. The problem occurred while
processing the segment placement command
> "-Z(DATA)CSTACK+_STACK_SIZE#", where at the moment of placement the
available memory ranges were "CODE:2C3-300"
> Reserved ranges relevant to this placement:
> CODE:200-203 DATA16_I
> CODE:204-2C2 DATA16_Z
> -------------
>
> My buffers are declared at top of file:
>
> unsigned char queueType[64];
> unsigned char queueData[64];
>
> Anyone know how I can make these buffers larger?
>
> TIA.
>
>
>
>

Hi!

On 2010-12-03 21:26, baxtercodeworks wrote:
> 1. by "custom linker command file", I assume you're talking about
> overriding the XCL file name.

Yes.
> 2. In thrashing around a bit with malloc, I found that I was using the
> CLIB and malloc was not available. Any downsides of moving to the DLIB?

CLib do have an implementation of malloc. However, I would recommend
using DLib as it provides lots more features and complies to the
standards. (The CLib library is basically only provided for backward
compatibility.)

DLib contains much, much more functions as it includes the full C99
runtime library. However, when using features provided by both
libraries, DLib should be as small, or smaller, than CLib even though it
might wary from function to function.

The CLib and DLib library is based on the same code, when it comes to
the low-level routines like the startup code and math routines that
corresponds to operators like +, -, *, /. However, the things that
differ are routines written in C.

An advantage of DLib is that only one hardware breakpoint is needed for
all kind of communication between the library and the debugger. CLib
requires one for "putchar", one for "exit" etc.

Finally, if your application overrides low-level CLib routines for
output (__putchar) or a custom printf-variant, they would have to be
reimplemented in terms of DLib primitives (__write etc.)
> 3. Looking at moving a command table to Flash, I find that (at runtime)
> the table has a very different memory address from the buffer(s) and
> they won't conflict. In playing around with various sizes, etc, it
> almost looks like the buffer size is limited or affected by the segment
> size (128 bytes)- not sure what is going on there.

If you place them in normal "const" memory, they should end up in
DATA16_C. This memory is not affected by segmentation.

On the other hand, if you explicitly place it in "INFOA", it has a
limited size, which is clearly seen in the linker command file.

Even though both of them are placed in flash, the idea is that read-only
data should be placed in normal "const" memory (i.e. DATA16_C), whereas
things that could be modified by reprogramming the flash should be
stored in info-memory.
> 4. Wasn't generating a map file, will do that and see if that helps any.

Please do, it's a great source of information on how the final
application is constructed. It can, for example, be used to find parts
that could be trimmed away.

-- Anders Lindgren, IAR Systems
--
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this posting are strictly my own and
not necessarily those of my employer.

1. by "custom linker command file", I assume you're talking about overriding the XCL file name.

2. In thrashing around a bit with malloc, I found that I was using the CLIB and malloc was not available. Any downsides of moving to the DLIB?

3. Looking at moving a command table to Flash, I find that (at runtime) the table has a very different memory address from the buffer(s) and they won't conflict. In playing around with various sizes, etc, it almost looks like the buffer size is limited or affected by the segment size (128 bytes)- not sure what is going on there.

4. Wasn't generating a map file, will do that and see if that helps any.
--- In m..., Anders Lindgren wrote:
>
> On 2010-12-02 22:34, baxtercodeworks wrote:
> > Pursuant to other research, I'm looking at lnk430F122.xcl and I find
> > that -D_HEAP_SIZEP. I'm not doing any mallocs, can I grab some of the
> > heap for my buffers? If so, do I just set -D_HEAP_SIZE smaller, or do I
> > need to do more?
>
> Hi!
>
> If you're not using the heap, it will not be included in your application.
>
> However, the stack will always be included, so you could try to reduce
> it. However, it you reduce it too much and your application use more
> stack that it is assigned, if will fail in non-obvious ways.
>
> One way to figure out exactly how much RAM your application is using is
> to "fake" the RAM size by modifying a custom linker command file. That
> way you could look at the linker map file to see exactly what is placed
> in RAM.
>
> Good luck with your hunt!
>
> -- Anders Lindgren, IAR Systems
> --
> Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this posting are strictly my own and
> not necessarily those of my employer.
>

On 2010-12-02 22:34, baxtercodeworks wrote:
> Pursuant to other research, I'm looking at lnk430F122.xcl and I find
> that -D_HEAP_SIZEP. I'm not doing any mallocs, can I grab some of the
> heap for my buffers? If so, do I just set -D_HEAP_SIZE smaller, or do I
> need to do more?

Hi!

If you're not using the heap, it will not be included in your application.

However, the stack will always be included, so you could try to reduce
it. However, it you reduce it too much and your application use more
stack that it is assigned, if will fail in non-obvious ways.

One way to figure out exactly how much RAM your application is using is
to "fake" the RAM size by modifying a custom linker command file. That
way you could look at the linker map file to see exactly what is placed
in RAM.

Good luck with your hunt!

-- Anders Lindgren, IAR Systems
--
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this posting are strictly my own and
not necessarily those of my employer.