 | | pbLua Beta 3 - Available
|
|
All, pbLua beta 3 is available now at: (URL) This new version has the bug in the regulation fixed, and the default motor mode is brake, not float. I've also updated the API docs to correct errors (there are probably more) and added an install doc (...) (17 years ago, 22-Mar-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt, lugnet.robotics.nxt.nxthacking)
|
| |
| | Re: The standard NXT firmware & the case of the missing opcodes
|
|
(...) I guess what I'm saying is '<<=', 'OP_ASL' and 'OP_LSL' are all the same thing (zero fill). '>>=' means either 'OP_ASR' (smear fill) or 'OP_LSR' (zero fill) depending on whether your target is signed or not. If you wanted direct equivalents (...) (17 years ago, 21-Mar-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt.nxthacking)
|
| |
| | Re: The standard NXT firmware & the case of the missing opcodes
|
|
(...) Having used shifts in Z80 assembly before, I can see the uses of the different types. However, I can't see how I'd want anything other than arithmetical in the NBC opcodes. The only times I used logical, rotating, or with-carry-bit shifts was (...) (17 years ago, 21-Mar-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt.nxthacking)
|
| |
| | The standard NXT firmware & the case of the missing opcodes
|
|
There are several opcodes defined in c_cmd_bytecodes.h which are missing from the VM implementation in c_cmd.c Here are the ones that are not implemented: //Family: Bit manipulation #define OP_CMNT 0x0A // dest, src #define OP_LSL 0x0B // dest, src (...) (17 years ago, 21-Mar-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt.nxthacking)
|
| |
| | Re: Enhanced standard NXT firmware
|
|
... (...) Hi John, I just tried to load it and just tested the "Try-me" light sensor. It worked fine. Not so much help, but I can try some more another day. Good work. Rasmus (...) (17 years ago, 19-Mar-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt.nxthacking, lugnet.robotics, lugnet.robotics.nxt)
|
| |
| | Missing links?
|
|
Hi guys, Are there missing any links in the "stable" section (the one with the links to RobotC, pbLua NBC etc) to the left of the forum (most likely since I put them there...)? I don't know if all can edit it but otherwise you can probably write to (...) (17 years ago, 18-Mar-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt.nxthacking)
|
| |
| | Re: Enhanced standard NXT firmware
|
|
(...) I would have liked to have one permanently, but it seems a little steep. Last summer I got a limited edition (32KB or something) along with the an AT91 evaluation board. (...) Perhaps Section 5.1 is useful: (URL) I just tried to post but it (...) (17 years ago, 17-Mar-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt.nxthacking, lugnet.robotics, lugnet.robotics.nxt)
|
| |
| | Re: Enhanced standard NXT firmware
|
|
(...) It actually was not a very big deal. I was familiar with the firmware source code since I had looked at it quite a bit since it was released, trying to figure out how to get it to compile with GCC. All the RIC bug fixes were things I figured (...) (17 years ago, 17-Mar-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt.nxthacking, lugnet.robotics, lugnet.robotics.nxt)
|
| |
| | Re: Enhanced standard NXT firmware
|
|
(...) <snipped description> Holy crap John! You've been really busy! For anyone poking around in this forum, I can say that what John has done is pretty significant. I have written my own firmware for the brick so I know how much work must have gone (...) (17 years ago, 17-Mar-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt.nxthacking, lugnet.robotics, lugnet.robotics.nxt)
|
| |
| | Enhanced standard NXT firmware
|
|
Over the past couple days I have used the IAR Embedded Workbench to implement some enhancements and bug fixes for the standard NXT firmware. The bug fixes are as follows: 1. RIC drawing code incorrectly checked the size of the OP_LINE structure for (...) (17 years ago, 16-Mar-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt.nxthacking, lugnet.robotics, lugnet.robotics.nxt)
|
| |
| | Re: GCC vs. IAR compiler: Could GCC be tweaked to generate code as tight as IAR?
|
|
(...) OK. This is good info!!! It is hard to guess that this was the way to do it. It also makes some sense for LEGO to use their file manager to do this rather than having a second tool replicate a filemanager on the host and insert it at compile (...) (17 years ago, 15-Mar-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt.nxthacking)
|
| |
| | Re: GCC vs. IAR compiler: Could GCC be tweaked to generate code as tight as IAR?
|
|
(...) Hi Dick Swan, That is a nice flexible way of doing it. I will see if I can figure it out in gcc. Thanks for the idea. (...) Well...I have -=Os on, which are all size reducing features. The actual "problem" can also be this packed stuff that we (...) (17 years ago, 15-Mar-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt.nxthacking)
|
| |
| | Re: GCC vs. IAR compiler: Could GCC be tweaked to generate code as tight as IAR?
|
|
(...) LEGO is using a slightly older version of IAR Embedded Workbench. Maybe that explains it. Or maybe its a 1.03 vs 1.04 source code difference. (...) I have been told that the following is the standard operating procedure for generating the (...) (17 years ago, 15-Mar-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt.nxthacking)
|
| |
| | Re: GCC vs. IAR compiler: Could GCC be tweaked to generate code as tight as IAR?
|
|
Regarrding overwriting the flash system. I encountered the problem of flash file system overwriting user code as well. It's because it is hard coded in the code the starting address of the file system. There's a constant named "STARTOFUSERFLASH" (...) (17 years ago, 14-Mar-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt.nxthacking)
|
| |
| | Re: GCC vs. IAR compiler: Could GCC be tweaked to generate code as tight as IAR?
|
|
... (...) I have not done that. Well, just a little bit:-). The best one (not surprisingly) is the "-Os" optimization, which does this "Optimize for size. -Os enables all -O2 optimizations that do not typically increase code size." (...) I tried (...) (17 years ago, 14-Mar-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt.nxthacking)
|
| |
| | Re: GCC vs. IAR compiler: Could GCC be tweaked to generate code as tight as IAR?
|
|
(...) I did not do so. The memory map in LEGO_MINDSTORMS_NXT_..._v1.03.bin is like this for the files: 0x11F000-0x12E99D Actual files like Demo.rxe 0x13FF00-0x13FF37 FILE_HANDLE(s) 0x13FFFC-0c13FFFF FILEVERSION The nxtgcc stuff compiles to 126176 (...) (17 years ago, 14-Mar-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt.nxthacking)
|
| |
| | Re: GCC vs. IAR compiler: Could GCC be tweaked to generate code as tight as IAR?
|
|
(...) Have you experimented at all with the compiler optimisation flags? I don't know if all of them are supported for the ARM architecture, and some options cause problems on other architectures, but there's a bit of a list here: (URL) removing (...) (17 years ago, 14-Mar-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt.nxthacking)
|
| |
| | Re: GCC vs. IAR compiler: Could GCC be tweaked to generate code as tight as IAR?
|
|
(...) More precisely, I was told to increase the STARTOFUSERFLASH value if I increased the firmware size beyond the current value. The unmodified source code compiles to 121324 bytes using the current evaluation version of the IAR Embedded Workbench (...) (17 years ago, 14-Mar-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt.nxthacking)
|
| |
| | Re: GCC vs. IAR compiler: Could GCC be tweaked to generate code as tight as IAR?
|
|
(...) Are you adjusting these values in d_loader.h? #define STARTOFFILETABLE (0x13FF00L) #define STARTOFUSERFLASH (0x11F000L) #define SIZEOFUSERFLASH (STARTOFFILETABLE - STARTOFUSERFLASH) I've been told by folks at LEGO that if I grow the size of (...) (17 years ago, 14-Mar-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt.nxthacking)
|
| |
| | GCC vs. IAR compiler: Could GCC be tweaked to generate code as tight as IAR?
|
|
Hi, If I compile the LEGO firmware sources with gcc, the code size increases much beyond the 128 KB (which I think) the IAR compiled sources fits into. That means that one have to relocate part of the compiled code into the memory areas between (...) (17 years ago, 14-Mar-07, to lugnet.robotics.nxt.nxthacking)
|
