[ECOS] eCos and Keil

[ECOS] eCos and Keil

[Stanislav Meduna]

Hi,

did anybody try to tweak the eCos to allow building with Keil
MDK-ARM?

The thing is Keil produces _much_ smaller (a saving of 1/3
is often doable) and faster code. For embedded systems
this matters a lot.

I understand that this is not trivial, as some of the code
is dependent on gcc-specific features and the build system
is tailored to the GNU tools.

Thanks
-- 
                                 Stano

-- 
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss

Re: [ECOS] eCos and Keil

[Ilija Kocho [Илија Кочо]]

Hi Stano,

I am playing with GCC 6.1 and it gives 20% beetter Coremark than GCC 4.9.

I would like to submit GCC 6.1 as a replacement for GCC 4.6 but there's
one important issue with GCC 5.0 and newer. Namely, they have adopted
GCC 11 as standard mode rather than 89. which mainly affects inlining.
For the time being I have solved this problem by enforcing 89 mode on
GCC, but I am in a dilemma whether to:

   1. Enforce mode 89 (as I do now)
   2. Make eCos to work in C11 mode. In this case I will need some help.

Regards

Ilija





On 03.02.2016 16:42, Stanislav Meduna wrote:
> Hi,
>
> did anybody try to tweak the eCos to allow building with Keil
> MDK-ARM?
>
> The thing is Keil produces _much_ smaller (a saving of 1/3
> is often doable) and faster code. For embedded systems
> this matters a lot.
>
> I understand that this is not trivial, as some of the code
> is dependent on gcc-specific features and the build system
> is tailored to the GNU tools.
>
> Thanks


-- 
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss