gnupic: Thread: gputils 1.2.0 #985

Hi,

I'm usually programming PICs in JAL. The compiler (JalV2) produces an 
.asm file which I sometimes throw to gpasm to see if it assembles fine. 
Today I built executables for eComStation (OS/2) from the latest 1.2.0 
#985 sources and did such a test. This showed an issue  for the 
ID-bytes. Below part of the gpasm listing. GPasm seems not to like the 
'org 2000', but since it repeats the message 4 times it might as well be 
the 'dw' statement following it (nevertheless the ID bytes are in the 
hex file).
Is this an issue with gpasm or with the .asm output of the JalV2 
compiler?  If needed I could send the complete .asm file.

Regards, Rob.


>                       03854
>                       03855 ; ID data
>                       03856
> 2000                  03857                                org     0x2000
> Warning[220]: Address exceeds maximum range for this processor.
> Warning[220]: Address exceeds maximum range for this processor.
> Warning[220]: Address exceeds maximum range for this processor.
> Warning[220]: Address exceeds maximum range for this processor.
> 2000   0000 0001 0005 03858                                dw      0,1,5,0
>        0000
>                       03859
>                       03860 ; EEPROM data
>                       03861
> 2100                  03862                                org     0x2100
> 2100   0000 0001 0005 03863                                dw      0,1,5,0
>        0000
>                       03864                                end




-- 
R. Hamerling, Netherlands --- http://www.robh.nl

Hi Rob,

gpasm (and MPASM) has a special __idconfig directive to set the ID 
locations which should be used instead of directly accessing the ID 
locations with org / dw directives, which is device dependent: different 
devices have ID locations on different addresses.

Maybe this is something you should report to the JAL development team...

P.S.: The warning is reported 4 times because 4 locations are modified 
by the dw directive.

Borut

On 02. 08. 2013 11:13, Rob Hamerling wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm usually programming PICs in JAL. The compiler (JalV2) produces an 
> .asm file which I sometimes throw to gpasm to see if it assembles 
> fine. Today I built executables for eComStation (OS/2) from the latest 
> 1.2.0 #985 sources and did such a test. This showed an issue  for the 
> ID-bytes. Below part of the gpasm listing. GPasm seems not to like the 
> 'org 2000', but since it repeats the message 4 times it might as well 
> be the 'dw' statement following it (nevertheless the ID bytes are in 
> the hex file).
> Is this an issue with gpasm or with the .asm output of the JalV2 
> compiler?  If needed I could send the complete .asm file.
>
> Regards, Rob.
>
>
>>                       03854
>>                       03855 ; ID data
>>                       03856
>> 2000                  03857 org     0x2000
>> Warning[220]: Address exceeds maximum range for this processor.
>> Warning[220]: Address exceeds maximum range for this processor.
>> Warning[220]: Address exceeds maximum range for this processor.
>> Warning[220]: Address exceeds maximum range for this processor.
>> 2000   0000 0001 0005 03858 dw      0,1,5,0
>>        0000
>>                       03859
>>                       03860 ; EEPROM data
>>                       03861
>> 2100                  03862 org     0x2100
>> 2100   0000 0001 0005 03863 dw      0,1,5,0
>>        0000
>>                       03864                                end
>
>
>
>

Hi Borut

On 2013/08/02 12:30, Borut Ražem wrote:

> gpasm (and MPASM) has a special __idconfig directive to set the ID
> locations which should be used instead of directly accessing the ID
> locations with org / dw directives, which is device dependent: different
> devices have ID locations on different addresses.
>
> Maybe this is something you should report to the JAL development team...

Aha, thanks (while I suppose you meant __IDLOCS)!
I have reported the issue to the author of the JalV2 compiler.

Regards, Rob.

-- 
R. Hamerling, Netherlands --- http://www.robh.nl

On 02. 08. 2013 16:37, Rob Hamerling wrote:
>
> Hi Borut
>
> On 2013/08/02 12:30, Borut Ražem wrote:
>
>> gpasm (and MPASM) has a special __idconfig directive to set the ID
>> locations which should be used instead of directly accessing the ID
>> locations with org / dw directives, which is device dependent: different
>> devices have ID locations on different addresses.
>>
>> Maybe this is something you should report to the JAL development team...
>
> Aha, thanks (while I suppose you meant __IDLOCS)!

Indeed, I meant __IDLOCS! Sorry for the mistake :-[

> I have reported the issue to the author of the JalV2 compiler.

Great!

Borut