Getting my program to load (Code Composer)

Larry Martell wrote:
> Dan Mills wrote:
> 
>>Larry Martell wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I don't want to slow down any part of the system by doing this. I
>>>am also timing some things on the P4 side too. Messages and data
> 
> are
> 
>>>being passed back and forth between the P4 and the DSP and if I
> 
> stop
> 
>>>and do some calculations it will skew the results.
>>
>>
>>Humm, OK.
>>Do you have a spare IO pin? set it high at the start of your time
> 
> consuming
> 
>>code then low at the end (probably one instruction each).
>>Connect to simple RC lowpass filter and a meter and read off
> 
> processor load
> 
>>directly (or to a scope if you are looking for exact timing details)!
> 
> 
> At had to smile at this because a EE I work with suggested the same
> thing.
> He suggested it to a room full of programmers ... we all looked at each
> 
> other and smiled. And I said, "Well, that's a EE's solution ..."
> 
> Thanks!
> -larry

Those who restrict the domain of solutions they accept get fewer 
workable solutions.

Jerry
-- 
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
�����������������������������������������������������������������������

Jerry Avins wrote:
> Larry Martell wrote:
> > Dan Mills wrote:
> >
> >>Larry Martell wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>I don't want to slow down any part of the system by doing this. I
> >>>am also timing some things on the P4 side too. Messages and data
> >
> > are
> >
> >>>being passed back and forth between the P4 and the DSP and if I
> >
> > stop
> >
> >>>and do some calculations it will skew the results.
> >>
> >>
> >>Humm, OK.
> >>Do you have a spare IO pin? set it high at the start of your time
> >
> > consuming
> >
> >>code then low at the end (probably one instruction each).
> >>Connect to simple RC lowpass filter and a meter and read off
> >
> > processor load
> >
> >>directly (or to a scope if you are looking for exact timing
details)!
> >
> >
> > At had to smile at this because a EE I work with suggested the same
> > thing.
> > He suggested it to a room full of programmers ... we all looked at
each
> >
> > other and smiled. And I said, "Well, that's a EE's solution ..."
> >
> > Thanks!
> > -larry
>
> Those who restrict the domain of solutions they accept get fewer
> workable solutions.

I did not mean to imply this was a bad solution ... just a different
one
from what a software person would come up with

-larry

Larry Martell wrote:

   ...

> I did not mean to imply this was a bad solution ... just a different
> one from what a software person would come up with

To continue a bit in snide mode: I thought that even software people did 
I/O.

Now for philosopher mode: software amounts to instructions for hardware. 
While it may be possible to create instructions for for a structure that 
one doesn't fully understand -- some officers and executives do that -- 
knowing what one is really doing is usually very beneficial.

Jerry
-- 
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
�����������������������������������������������������������������������

Jerry Avins wrote:
> Larry Martell wrote:
>
>    ...
>
> > I did not mean to imply this was a bad solution ... just a
different
> > one from what a software person would come up with
>
> To continue a bit in snide mode: I thought that even software people
did
> I/O.

Of course software people do I/O. My point was that as a software
person
my initial thoughts do not usually involve lowpass filters, meters, and
oscilloscopes. It's just like if you're sick and you go to a
traditional
western medical doctor then will give drugs, if you go to a surgon they
will operate, and if you go to a native american shaman they will give
you
herbs.

> Now for philosopher mode: software amounts to instructions for
hardware.
> While it may be possible to create instructions for for a structure
that
> one doesn't fully understand -- some officers and executives do that
--
> knowing what one is really doing is usually very beneficial.

I agree it's extremely beneficial, but very often not possible. I've
worked on many large software projects that for various reasons
management
activly prevented any one person from knowing the big picture or even
how
your piece was going to be used. I've also worked on software for
extremely complicated systems that I would never have a hope of
understanding.

-larry