Dear Peter Tyser,
In message 1276632905.32134.1535.camel@petert you wrote:
I think by default its not possible to guarantee function order in gcc's output if a file contains multiple functions. We could create a basic
Correct. If you check for example the "timer" example program (build for some 8xx system, say TQM860L) you can see that it's sufficient to have a forward declaration for a static function before the real code that the C compiler will place the code for this function in front, whichis probably not what you want here.
linker script... I think we could also do it with some gcc/ld-foo like:
--- a/examples/standalone/Makefile +++ b/examples/standalone/Makefile @@ -78,6 +78,7 @@ CPPFLAGS += -I.. # inconsistent. ifeq ($(ARCH),powerpc) CFLAGS := $(filter-out $(RELFLAGS),$(CFLAGS)) +CFLAGS += -fno-toplevel-reorder endif
This alone is sufficient to "fix" for example the aforementioned "timer" example program.
Without:
... 00040428 T strcmp 000400e8 T timer 00040000 t timer_handler 00040318 T tstc 00040398 T udelay ...
With:
... 00040428 T strcmp 00040000 T timer 000402b8 t timer_handler 00040318 T tstc 00040398 T udelay ...
all: $(obj).depend $(OBJS) $(LIB) $(SREC) $(BIN) $(ELF) @@ -88,7 +89,7 @@ $(LIB): $(obj).depend $(LIBOBJS)
$(ELF): $(obj)%: $(obj)%.o $(LIB)
$(LD) -g -Ttext $(STANDALONE_LOAD_ADDR) \
$(LD) -g -Ttext $(STANDALONE_LOAD_ADDR) -sort-common \ -o $@ -e $(SYM_PREFIX)$(notdir $(<:.o=)) $< $(LIB) \ -L$(gcclibdir) -lgcc
I'm not sure if this is needed.
Could you try the above change with your flash_wp test case? Or make the flash_wp app public? It should put the first function at the base of the image in theory.
I think the "timer" code is sufficient to show the problem, and that your fix helps. If Timur confirms it's working for his secret code too we should apply this.
Thanks a lot!
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk