Hi Thomas,

 

Thanks for the confirm 😉

 

Let’s see if we can refine this part from a coding perspective.

 

/Ken

 

From: TF-M <tf-m-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Thomas Törnblom via TF-M
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2021 4:53 PM
To: tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: Re: [TF-M] Inline asm syntax unified and symbol reference in IAR toolchain

 

Hi Ken,

We have an open ticket for just consuming the ".syntax unified", which is set to be fixed in a future update.

I've tested your suggestion for "#pragma required" and it doesn't seem to work.

Cheers,
Thomas

Den 2021-10-19 kl. 09:22, skrev Ken Liu via TF-M:

Hi Thomas and all,

 

I noticed there are some

 

#if !defined(__ICCARM__)

        ".syntax unified                  \n"

#endif

 

In source code, looks like �.syntax unified� is not support in IAR, is that true? If it could not be supported in a short term, we can define some wrapper such as:

 

#ifdef __ICCARM__

#define CLAIM_SYNTAX_UNIFIED �\n�

#else

#define CLAIM_SYNTAX_UNIFIED ".syntax unified                  \n"

#endif

 

 

Another question is about the:

#if defined(__ICCARM__)

#pragma required = do_schedule

#endif

 

If we claim do_schedule in the constraints, is the above �#pragma required� still needed?

 

__asm (��.  :: �i�(do_schedule));

 

We can create a patch to test this � using a constraint looks more proper.

 

Thanks.

 

/Ken

 



 

--

Thomas T�rnblom, Product Engineer
IAR Systems AB
Box 23051, Strandbodgatan 1
SE-750 23 Uppsala, SWEDEN
Mobile: +46 76 180 17 80 Fax: +46 18 16 78 01
E-mail:
thomas.tornblom@iar.com Website: www.iar.com
Twitter:
www.twitter.com/iarsystems