gnupic: gputils 1.2.0 #985
Subject:
Re: gputils 1.2.0 #985
From:
Borut ####@####.####
Date:
2 Aug 2013 10:31:52 -0000
Message-Id: <51FB8A59.3070003@gmail.com>
Hi Rob,
gpasm (and MPASM) has a special __idconfig directive to set the ID
locations which should be used instead of directly accessing the ID
locations with org / dw directives, which is device dependent: different
devices have ID locations on different addresses.
Maybe this is something you should report to the JAL development team...
P.S.: The warning is reported 4 times because 4 locations are modified
by the dw directive.
Borut
On 02. 08. 2013 11:13, Rob Hamerling wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm usually programming PICs in JAL. The compiler (JalV2) produces an
> .asm file which I sometimes throw to gpasm to see if it assembles
> fine. Today I built executables for eComStation (OS/2) from the latest
> 1.2.0 #985 sources and did such a test. This showed an issue for the
> ID-bytes. Below part of the gpasm listing. GPasm seems not to like the
> 'org 2000', but since it repeats the message 4 times it might as well
> be the 'dw' statement following it (nevertheless the ID bytes are in
> the hex file).
> Is this an issue with gpasm or with the .asm output of the JalV2
> compiler? If needed I could send the complete .asm file.
>
> Regards, Rob.
>
>
>> 03854
>> 03855 ; ID data
>> 03856
>> 2000 03857 org 0x2000
>> Warning[220]: Address exceeds maximum range for this processor.
>> Warning[220]: Address exceeds maximum range for this processor.
>> Warning[220]: Address exceeds maximum range for this processor.
>> Warning[220]: Address exceeds maximum range for this processor.
>> 2000 0000 0001 0005 03858 dw 0,1,5,0
>> 0000
>> 03859
>> 03860 ; EEPROM data
>> 03861
>> 2100 03862 org 0x2100
>> 2100 0000 0001 0005 03863 dw 0,1,5,0
>> 0000
>> 03864 end
>
>
>
>
