CCS C Software and Maintenance Offers
FAQFAQ   FAQForum Help   FAQOfficial CCS Support   SearchSearch  RegisterRegister 

ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

CCS does not monitor this forum on a regular basis.

Please do not post bug reports on this forum. Send them to support@ccsinfo.com
Odd PCM generated code

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    CCS Forum Index -> General CCS C Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
dave3
Guest
Odd PCM generated code
PostPosted: Sun Apr 18, 2004 8:50 pm     Reply with quote
In the process of studying the PCM output for function pointers, I came across the following generated code, which appears redundant.
Code:

....................   case 1:
....................     ret= fn1;
0013:  MOVLW  00
0014:  MOVWF  7A
0015:  MOVLW  2B
0016:  MOVWF  25
0017:  MOVF   7A,W
0018:  MOVWF  26


Since 7A isn't used anywhere else, why isn't a
Code:
CLRF 26
used instead? Am I missing something? As you may infer, fn1() is at 002B. The variable 'ret' is the return value for a function which returns a pointer to one of two functions. 'ret' is declared an fptr, defined as:
Code:

typedef int8 (*fptr)();
Interestingly, if I tried returning the 'fn1' pointer directly from the switch statement, the compiler generates a warning. I'd be happy to post the entire .LST file if anyone's interested. Thanks for any insight.
Ttelmah
Guest
Re: Odd PCM generated code
PostPosted: Mon Apr 19, 2004 2:05 am     Reply with quote
dave3 wrote:
In the process of studying the PCM output for function pointers, I came across the following generated code, which appears redundant.
Code:

....................   case 1:
....................     ret= fn1;
0013:  MOVLW  00
0014:  MOVWF  7A
0015:  MOVLW  2B
0016:  MOVWF  25
0017:  MOVF   7A,W
0018:  MOVWF  26


Since 7A isn't used anywhere else, why isn't a
Code:
CLRF 26
used instead? Am I missing something? As you may infer, fn1() is at 002B. The variable 'ret' is the return value for a function which returns a pointer to one of two functions. 'ret' is declared an fptr, defined as:
Code:

typedef int8 (*fptr)();
Interestingly, if I tried returning the 'fn1' pointer directly from the switch statement, the compiler generates a warning. I'd be happy to post the entire .LST file if anyone's interested. Thanks for any insight.

Remember a pointer, is a two byte value. Though in your case, the address of fn1, is in the low bank, and hence the high byte is '0', this won't allways be the case. The compiler potentially could optimise this specific case (of a funtion in the low 256 bytes), to use a clrf for the high byte, but the code is generic, and transfers the high byte of the address, using a 'scratch' register (7A should be defined as 'scratch' if you look in the variable declaration listing).

Best Wishes
dave3
Guest
PostPosted: Mon Apr 19, 2004 12:53 pm     Reply with quote
But why isn't the scratch register optimized away?
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    CCS Forum Index -> General CCS C Discussion All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group