Re: Help me Plz!Debugging RAM version of build,produces rt output,Bin version does not!

On 18 Dec, in article
<1134899638.078138.78490@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
ssubba@xxxxxxxxx "ssubbarayan" wrote:
>Paul Carpenter wrote:
>> On 16 Dec, in article
>> <1134738076.105723.202110@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ssubba@xxxxxxxxx "ssubbarayan" wrote:
>> >Hans-Bernhard Broeker wrote:
>> >> In comp.arch.embedded ssubbarayan <ssubba@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > We have a consumer electronics appliance in which when the Target boots
>> >> > up and puts a logo screen,when the user presses a key in the remote,the
>> >> > target crashes.This happens in the ROM version of build.
>> >> > When we debug it in RAM version,it never happens.I am clueless what
>> >> > could be possible reason for this.
>> >>
>> >> Given the minimal amount of information you give, it's pretty much
>> >> guaranteed that nobody else can have more of a clue than you do.

..........

>> >> And how is that ROM build actually different from the RAM build? The
>> >> one special case you mentioned hints that you didn't understand your
>> >> tools well enough to turn on all needed options for them to support a
>> >> feature of the standardized language like static initializers.
>>
>> >Hans,
.....
>> >Our target Board boots up and puts a screen like this:
>> >Wait a moment please.... along with Logo of my company.When we press
>> >any remote key at this display our target crashes in the ROM version.We
>> >use ST ELECTRONICS PROPRIETORY MICRO CONTROLLER for video
>> >applications.They have provided a ICE for debugging RAM version.
>>
>> So you need to find out from ST ELECTRONICS what their ICE does and the
>> differences in building a RAM image.
>>
>> >Now when we build the same and download it to RAM this scenerio never
>> >happens.By the way I would like to know about "static initializers"
>> >mentioned by you?
>>
>> What language are you writing your application in? It suggests a lack of
>> understanding of the language you are using.
>>
>> >The only difference between these 2 versions is the way the code is
>> >built.The ROM version actually combines thirdparty software along with
>> >our code to make final image.We dont have source code for third party
>> >software only binary is available.
>>
>> Is the 3rd party image that you link with to build the ROM version the
>> EXACT same image you use for RAM version?
>>
>> It still suggests to me that there is a startup code difference between
>> the images about initialising variables that is hidden by the RAM version.
>> Possibly the RAM version of the image ensures that parts are actually zero
>> before use but the ROM 3rd part image does not and relies on your startup
>> code.
>>
>> Possibly you are initialising areas in the startup incorrectly, i.e.
>> initialising parts of RAM that are correct for ROM version but when linked
>> with the ROM version the starts of variable area is at a different address
>> to RAM version but the RAM image version are being initialised.
>>
>> You need to check that all the changes you have to make between RAM and ROM
>> versions and ensure they are ALL being changed correctly. You need to find
>> out what ALL the differences between RAM and ROM versions of the 3rd party
>> image are.
>>
>> The ICE may well be zeroing memory before download and hiding the issues.

>Paul,
>Thanks for your detailed mail.It was really helpful to me to understand
>the differences.As you asked,I am giving below these information:
>I use C language and proprietory RTOS given by ST MICRO ELECTRONICS by
>name OS20.

Not familiar SPECIFICALLY with that OS, but aware of other systems and OS.

>I would like to understand from you how to make sure the startup code
>intialises all the variables properly?

This should be explained in manuals for the version of C you are using and
the RTOS manual.

>As you suggested,we once had a problem when building the ROM version
>which said,
>def_bss section memory bigger then available memory and this did not
>happen in my RAM version.I believe its a proof that what you are saying
>is happening to me.

What it means to me is that either

1/ When you run in a RAM version the total size of RAM is way bigger
than the combined size of RAM and ROM on your 'ROM' system hardware.

2/ You have not properly defined your RAM areas for what RAM you
have in your 'ROM' hardware.

3/ You have used up too much RAM in your 'ROM' system for variables
than there is available.

4/ You have not checked the actual sizes of your programme and data
areas that the linked version gives you. There must be a MAP file
somewhere you can examine.

>Is it possible for you to confirm me whether this message confirms the
>same?

No not without a LOT more information, which considering you give the
APPEARANCE of being an application programmer doing embedded work thinking
he has the 'unlimited' memory of a PC, means the problems could be many.

You do not appear to have the grasp of your tools (compiler and OS), hardware
and how to structure for embedded version.

>Incase you are confirming it,Can you help me to understand how to
>resolve it?I mean what should be my approach and where should I start
>looking to overcome this problem?

If this is a commercial product, I suggest you need to hire someone in
who has experience of embedded systems even on consultancy basis who is
allowed to see the hardware, circuit diagrams, manuals, tools being used,
source code and project files.

--
Paul Carpenter | paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<http://www.pcserviceselectronics.co.uk/> PC Services
<http://www.gnuh8.org.uk/> GNU H8 & mailing list info
<http://www.badweb.org.uk/> For those web sites you hate

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Problems with IE after clean Install of Win XP & SP2
    ... I think hardware check may be my next step. ... The system is a Dell Dimension 8600, 232 GB hard drive, 1GB ram. ... Memory performace seems fine - Commit figures (Total=315 MG and Peak ... I* have only loaded Avast antivirus and MS Office 2003. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: Virtual Memory in use at 100%
    ... I just had a Hardware Malfunction again. ... I had to restart the server so I ... hardware problem but a software memory leak and they told me that the best ... > RAM compatibility, etc, can be the torture of anyone doing hardware/OS support. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: Installing applications in ROM WM 2003
    ... I feel rather safe in saying it's just not going to happen short of a WM5 ... The today screen is configured in ram, when the power fails that RAM ... To my mind you want features that your hardware just doesn't support. ... has been able to interpret the BIN images that seem to make up the ROM ...
    (microsoft.public.pocketpc)
  • Re: OTF Encryption? Basic PPC2003 se security questions? (newbie)
    ... > since rom files can be displaced by replacement files. ... This suggests that the loader looks at a "replacement" folder before ... > added programs can be loaded into ram or memory cards, ... > hard reset the device which erases all ram content. ...
    (microsoft.public.pocketpc)
  • Re: Virtual Memory in use at 100%
    ... > well it could be the ram you had that went bad... ... > I just had a Hardware Malfunction again. ... I had to restart the server so I ... > hardware problem but a software memory leak and they told me that the best ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)