??? 08/09/04 05:07 Read: times |
#75653 - RE: Reliability of BIT flags Responding to: ???'s previous message |
As to software bug - the offending piece may be not in the "offending area". Say, R1 contains a semi-random value from some previous process. Now you issue MOV @R1,#0 instead or MOV R1,#0 and your program may work fine (i.e. that was a non-critical delay counter) unless the value pointed at by R1 was important - and since the bit addressed memory is overlaid with standard scratchpad, a common byte write can change the bit flags just as well.
In C it's even more notable when you write to an uninitialized pointer or beyond the end of a string. |
Topic | Author | Date |
Reliability of BIT flags | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Reliability of BIT flags | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Reliability of BIT flags | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Triple redundancy? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Triple redundancy_Of Course! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Triple redundancy? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Triple redundancy? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Triple redundancy? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Single point failure | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Reliability of BIT flags | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Reliability of BIT flags | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Reliability of BIT flags | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Reliability of BIT flags | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Reliability of BIT flags | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Reliability of BIT flags | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Reliability of BIT flags | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Reliability of BIT flags | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Reliability of BIT flags | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Reliability of BIT flags | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Correctness of any signal from outside | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
A sane portion of paranoia![]() | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Thanks - The thread can close | 01/01/70 00:00 |