Re: [avr-gcc-list] Function pointers on > 128 KiB devices, how to?

[Joerg Wunsch]

Dale Whitfield <address@hidden> wrote:

> This will create an explicit trampoline. The rest of your code would
> remain the same. I've used this technique in a slightly different
> way previously. Caution: Compiled and inspected but not
> tested/simulated!

Thanks for the ideas.  That's still not quite ideal for me (if
possible, I'd like to hide all compiler dependencies in a single
header file, as this is a multi-compiler project), but it might at
least be a way around.

We've also got function pointers as callbacks (so Stu's idea of
putting everything into a single segment won't work anyway), which so
far I don't have a real idea for.  Well, maybe I should declare them
as uint32_t (hidden in a typedef), and then write a FAR_CALL() macro
wrapper that emits some inline asm EICALL.

-- 
cheers, J"org               .-.-.   --... ...--   -.. .  DL8DTL

http://www.sax.de/~joerg/                        NIC: JW11-RIPE
Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)