This is the mail archive of the
ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the eCos project.
RE: malloc vs. new
- From: Scott Dattalo <scott at dattalo dot com>
- Cc: ecos-discuss at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 12:23:22 -0700 (PDT)
- Subject: RE: [ECOS] malloc vs. new
On Mon, 24 Jun 2002, Scott Dattalo wrote:
<snip>
I fixed my memory problem.
It turns out that my application is big. It's too big to fit into the
memory footprint provided bythe At91EB40 evaluation board. I know in the
future that I will be putting the application in different hardware, but
I'm using the eCos configuration that's available for the EB40. To make a
long story short, the memory foot print is defined for the AT91EB40 in
here:
ecos/packages/hal/arm/at91/current/include/pkgconf/
The RAM size is 0x80000. To work around this, I made a backup of pkgconf/
and changed all references of 0x80000 to 0x200000 and that works!
I know that one shouldn't go around trampling on the ecos sources in such
a way. But, what is the preferred way to change the memory foot print?
Should I create a new cdl for my hardware based on (say) the arm/at91/ and
edit those hardware-specific changes? It doesn't appear that fundamental
configuration such as this can be changed in ecos.ecc. (You *can* change
the size of the memalloc heap, but you can't make it bigger than the
memory footprint that's defined in pkgconf/, AFAICT).
Scott
--
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss