In the SEGMENTS section of the PRM file, named address ranges are defined for use in the PLACEMENT section. While it makes sense for __SEG_END_ to reflect used range for the sections/segments defined in the PLACEMENT section, it would be more useful if __SEG_END_ reflected the defined range for segments defined in the SEGMENTS section.
Example:
SEGMENTS
RAM = READ_WRITE 0xFD000'G TO 0xFFDFF'G;
STACK = NO_INIT 0x3E00 TO 0x3FF;
ROM_LOW = READ_ONLY 0x7F4000 to 0x7F6BFF;
ROM_EOL = NO_INIT 0x7F6C00 TO 0x7F6FFF;
ROM_CAL = NO_INIT 0x7F7000 TO 0x7F7FFF;
ROM_MID = READ_ONLY 0x7F8000 TO 0x7FBFFF;
ROM_HI = READ_ONLY 0x7FC000 TO 0x7FFEFF;
VECTORS = READ_ONLY 0x7FFF10 to 0x7FFFFF;
END
PLACEMENT
DEFAULT_RAM INTO RAM;
SSTACK INTO STACK;
DEFAULT_ROM INTO ROM_LOW, ROM_MID, ROM_HI;
INTVECT INTO VECTORS;
END
It would be useful for the address of __SEG_END_ROM_EOL to be 0x7F7000.
Solved! Go to Solution.
Hello
Please refer to following thread for instruction on how to request enhancement in the tool chain.
https://community.freescale.com/thread/77166
The way SEG_END is implemented today was useful to a lot of customers. So I would not suggest to change the way it works, but rather add a new command or functionality to the linker.
CrasyCat
Hello
Please refer to following thread for instruction on how to request enhancement in the tool chain.
https://community.freescale.com/thread/77166
The way SEG_END is implemented today was useful to a lot of customers. So I would not suggest to change the way it works, but rather add a new command or functionality to the linker.
CrasyCat