Other Parts Discussed in Thread: UNIFLASH
Tool/software:
Why do we use ALIGN(8) for .TI.ramfunc section and everywhere else in the linker command file but use ALIGN(4) for the Cla1Prog section.

This thread has been locked.
If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.
Tool/software:
Why do we use ALIGN(8) for .TI.ramfunc section and everywhere else in the linker command file but use ALIGN(4) for the Cla1Prog section.

Hi,
Flash needs 64-bit or 128 bit alignment, both ALIGN(4) and ALIGN(8) works.
However, if customer uses only CCS flash plugin and Uniflash, then ALIGN(4) is fine. This will save some memory for them when there are too many sections in their linker command file. If the number of sections are not too many, then ALIGN(8) is better - for performance enhancement.
Regards,
Rajeshwary
Please help with further details.
Thanks and regards, Pawan
Why is ALIGN(8) better for performance enhancement when compared to ALIGN(4)?
For faster programming.
You mentioned for CCS flash plugin and uniflash ALIGN(4) is fine; is there some other tool where this will not work out?
Other 3rd party tool might use ALIGN(8).
In the linker command why is there a difference between ALIGN for CLA vs other memory sections?
No sure about this may be we have to check with CLA expert.
Regards,
Rajeshwary