From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5090 invoked by alias); 3 Jul 2008 10:10:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 5082 invoked by uid 22791); 3 Jul 2008 10:10:32 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from londo.lunn.ch (HELO londo.lunn.ch) (80.238.139.98) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 Jul 2008 10:10:15 +0000 Received: from lunn by londo.lunn.ch with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1KELlT-0000hH-00; Thu, 03 Jul 2008 12:10:11 +0200 Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 10:10:00 -0000 From: Andrew Lunn To: Alexandre Cc: eCos Mailing List Message-ID: <20080703101011.GC27831@lunn.ch> Mail-Followup-To: Alexandre , eCos Mailing List References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact ecos-discuss-help@ecos.sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-discuss-owner@ecos.sourceware.org Subject: Re: [ECOS] Can excessive/intensive serial flow cause stack overflow? X-SW-Source: 2008-07/txt/msg00012.txt.bz2 On Thu, Jul 03, 2008 at 11:57:50AM +0200, Alexandre wrote: > Hi all, > > Working on a new eCos application & I stumble upon a disturbing problem. > > I'm working with eCos CVS on an LPC2106 platform with 2 UARTs. LPC2106 is an ARM right? First off, i would enable asserts in the INFRA package. It adds some CPU overheads, but that might actually help in your situation.... Next put a breakpoint in the abort handler. Once it fires, look at the stack pointers, program counter etc for the supervisor mode and interrupt mode registers. That should point you to what is causing the abort. Also lr - 4 is the address which caused the prefetch abort. r14 is the lr. Andrew -- Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss