This is the mail archive of the
ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the eCos project.
Re: Performance measurement
- From: Christer Kaivo-oja <christer dot kaivo at kvaser dot se>
- To: Gary Thomas <gary at chez-thomas dot org>
- Cc: eCos Discussion <ecos-discuss at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2002 16:27:12 +0200
- Subject: Re: [ECOS] Performance measurement
- References: <200206050926.g559Qd126562@rubicon.hasler.ascom.ch> <1023285519.3245.42.camel@hermes.chez-thomas.org>
On Wednesday 05 June 2002 16.17, Christer Kaivo-oja wrote:
> On Wednesday 05 June 2002 15.58, Gary Thomas wrote:
> > On Wed, 2002-06-05 at 07:53, Christer Kaivo-oja wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 05 June 2002 15.06, Gary Thomas wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2002-06-05 at 07:04, Christer Kaivo-oja wrote:
> > My guess is that this address (0x20000) overlaps with your GDB stubs.
>
> It shouldn't.. Here's the objdump -h of the stub:
> # arm-elf-objdump -h gdb_module.img
>
> gdb_module.img: file format elf32-littlearm
>
> Sections:
> Idx Name Size VMA LMA File off Algn
> 14 .data 000004bc 00080000 00017fdc 00010000 2**2
> CONTENTS, ALLOC, LOAD, DATA
> 15 .bss 00010a98 000804bc 000804bc 000104bc 2**4
> ALLOC
>
> There should be plenty of space at 0x20000...
>
Hmm.. Or maybe not as plenty as I thought... Looking at the tm_basic's
objdump I see the following:
15 .bss 00b26eb4 0002e148 0002e148 00016148 2**4
ALLOC
This bss field is most definately overlapping the stub bss at 0x80000...
Guess I should move the stubs bss field somewhere safe... :)
--
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss