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.
Hi
My problem is that when I'm running my program the program goes sometimes into the illegal isr. I couldn't localize until yet what makes calling the illegal isr. It seems that this behaviour is changing from compilation to compilation.
Yesterday it looks like the problem occurs by calling the malloc function. I had a look at the malloc function in the Disassembly view. There I saw that in the malloc function ESTOP0 is called (see below Disassembly code). After that I copied my project from the labtop to the workstation (Windows XP). In the Disassembly on the workstation this ESTOP0 are gone. I copied then the D:\Programme\ccsv4\tools\compiler\ folder from the workstation to the labtop. Nothing changed in the Disassembly this ESTOP0 is still there.
Does the compiler something different on a Win7 64bit computer? Must I do something different when installing on a Win7 64bit computer? Any ideas?
Thanks four your help
Matt
My platform and tools:
- Win7 64bit
- Code Composer Studio Version: 4.2.4.00033
- Compiler C2000 Code Generation Tools version 5.2.10
- TMS320F28023
A similar problem I've found in the community. Saddly there is no solution.
http://e2e.ti.com/support/microcontrollers/tms320c2000_32-bit_real-time_mcus/f/171/t/75817.aspx#275321
malloc:
0x3F6EAC: B2BD MOVL *SP++, XAR1
0x3F6EAD: 1EA6 MOVL @XAR6, ACC
0x3F6EAE: AABD MOVL *SP++, XAR2
0x3F6EAF: 86A9 MOVL XAR2, @ACC
0x3F6EB0: 06A6 MOVL ACC, @XAR6
0x3F6EB1: ED03 SBF 3, NEQ
0x3F6EB2: D100 MOVB XAR1, #0x0
0x3F6EB3: 6F4F SB 79, UNC
0x3F6EB4: 92A6 MOV AL, @AR6
0x3F6EB5: 9001 ANDB AL, #0x1
0x3F6EB6: EC04 SBF 4, EQ
0x3F6EB7: 06A6 MOVL ACC, @XAR6
0x3F6EB8: 0901 ADDB ACC, #1
0x3F6EB9: 86A9 MOVL XAR2, @ACC
0x3F6EBA: 761F0230 MOVW DP, #0x230
0x3F6EBC: C52A MOVL XAR7, @0x2a
0x3F6EBD: 3E67 LCR *XAR7
0x3F6EBE: 761F0230 MOVW DP, #0x230
0x3F6EC0: 921C MOV AL, @0x1c
0x3F6EC1: EC03 SBF 3, EQ
0x3F6EC2: 767F6E83 LCR minit
0x3F6EC4: 761F0230 MOVW DP, #0x230
0x3F6EC6: BE00 MOVB XAR6, #0x00
0x3F6EC7: 8B1E MOVL XAR1, @0x1e
0x3F6EC8: 6F04 SB 4, UNC
0x3F6EC9: C4A1 MOVL XAR6, @XAR1
0x3F6ECA: 8AA1 MOVL XAR4, @XAR1
0x3F6ECB: 8BD4 MOVL XAR1, *+XAR4[2]
0x3F6ECC: 8F3FFFFF MOVL XAR4, #0x3fffff
0x3F6ECE: A8A9 MOVL @ACC, XAR4
0x3F6ECF: 0FA1 CMPL ACC, @XAR1
0x3F6ED0: ED03 SBF 3, NEQ
0x3F6ED1: D100 MOVB XAR1, #0x0
0x3F6ED2: 6F2C SB 44, UNC
0x3F6ED3: A3C1 MOVL P, *+XAR1[0]
0x3F6ED4: A9A9 MOVL @ACC, P
0x3F6ED5: FF54 NEG ACC
0x3F6ED6: 1EA7 MOVL @XAR7, ACC
0x3F6ED7: AAA9 MOVL @ACC, XAR2
0x3F6ED8: 0FA7 CMPL ACC, @XAR7
0x3F6ED8: 62F0 SB -16, GT
0x3F6EDA: AAA9 MOVL @ACC, XAR2
0x3F6EDB: 0904 ADDB ACC, #4
0x3F6EDC: 0FA7 CMPL ACC, @XAR7
0x3F6EDD: 680D SB 13, LO
0x3F6EDE: 06A6 MOVL ACC, @XAR6
0x3F6EDF: ED06 SBF 6, NEQ
0x3F6EE0: 06D1 MOVL ACC, *+XAR1[2]
0x3F6EE1: 761F0230 MOVW DP, #0x230
0x3F6EE3: 1E1E MOVL @0x1e, ACC
0x3F6EE4: 6F04 SB 4, UNC
0x3F6EE5: 06D1 MOVL ACC, *+XAR1[2]
0x3F6EE6: 8AA6 MOVL XAR4, @XAR6
0x3F6EE7: 1ED4 MOVL *+XAR4[2], ACC
0x3F6EE8: C3C1 MOVL *+XAR1[0], XAR7
0x3F6EE9: 6F14 SB 20, UNC
0x3F6EEA: B2A9 MOVL @ACC, XAR1
0x3F6EEB: 07A2 ADDL ACC, @XAR2
0x3F6EEC: 0902 ADDB ACC, #2
0x3F6EED: 83A9 MOVL XAR5, @ACC
0x3F6EEE: AAA9 MOVL @ACC, XAR2
0x3F6EEF: 07AB ADDL ACC, @P
0x3F6EF0: 7625 ESTOP0
0x3F6EF1: 7625 ESTOP0
0x3F6EF2: AAC1 MOVL *+XAR1[0], XAR2
0x3F6EF3: 06A6 MOVL ACC, @XAR6
0x3F6EF4: ED05 SBF 5, NEQ
0x3F6EF5: 761F0230 MOVW DP, #0x230
0x3F6EF7: A01E MOVL @0x1e, XAR5
0x3F6EF8: 6F03 SB 3, UNC
0x3F6EF9: 8AA6 MOVL XAR4, @XAR6
0x3F6EFA: A0D4 MOVL *+XAR4[2], XAR5
0x3F6EFB: 06D1 MOVL ACC, *+XAR1[2]
0x3F6EFC: 1ED5 MOVL *+XAR5[2], ACC
0x3F6EFD: D902 ADDB XAR1, #2
0x3F6EFE: 761F0230 MOVW DP, #0x230
0x3F6F00: C528 MOVL XAR7, @0x28
0x3F6F01: 3E67 LCR *XAR7
0x3F6F02: 86BE MOVL XAR2, *--SP
0x3F6F03: 8AA1 MOVL XAR4, @XAR1
0x3F6F04: 8BBE MOVL XAR1, *--SP
<source line is not available>
0x3F6F05: 0006 LRETR
Matt said:Does the compiler something different on a Win7 64bit computer? Must I do something different when installing on a Win7 64bit computer?
The code generated by the compiler should not differ between a build on WinXP and one on Win7, as long as the same version of compiler tools and same build options are used in both cases.
If you search the C2000 device forum there are several posts there with advice on how to debug issues that result in illegal isr. The experts in that forum might have additional suggestions as well so I will move this thread to that forum.
Hi AartiG
Thankyou for your hint to look for posts how to debug issues that result in illegal isr. I'll check this.
What I'm still not understanding at the moment is why I had this ESTOP0 in the malloc function. Any Idea?
Best regards
Matt
Hi,
I found now a workaround.
At the first time I uninstalled the CCS4. Then I installed the CCS4 again and made the updates. I still saw this ESTOP0 when I compiled.
After that I decided to copy the installation folder from the workstation (Windows XP) to the laptop (Windows 7 64bit). If I compile now the ESTOP0 are disappeared.
I expect that the installer of CCS4 does something wrong under Win7 64bit. Could someone from TI check this please?
Thank you
Matt