| ??? 05/20/08 07:06 Read: times |
#154947 - It was the stack Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Thanks a million for the comments. It's a great privilege to be getting replies from experts.
Issue gets solved if I define it in code. I tried it after reading Jerson's solution. Actually, I could find the stack getting corrupted and the program running wild. After defining it in code, t works fine. Thanks for pointing out the issue. But, the chip has 4.4 K RAM and 64 K Flash. Since the chip is defined, shouldn't the compiler manage the memory automatically? (I mean, it knows it has got 4 K RAM). I actually require this long table in the RAM. Otherwise I will have to resort to partial loading into RAM, modifying it etc. Two reasons I went in for this chip is that it has 2 UARTs and that it has 4K RAM which is required for my database. I thought I will be able to use 1.5 K for database in RAM ! |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Array size limitation for Keil ? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| if you breakpoint | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Time to check the assembler output.... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: you can not break on the declaration of a vari | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
you can not break on the declaration of a variable | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| You seem to be declaring constant | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| It is fully possible.... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| idata as stack | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Keil compiler limits | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I agree - its not a limit | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Well maybe.... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| 64 or 128 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| It was the stack | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| The compiler cannot really guess .. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Glad you have it working | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Map the variables in correct memory area | 01/01/70 00:00 |