search for: atmega

Anyone else interested in an AVR backend? If so, for what members of the AVR family? If we do a port, likely it'll support only the ATmegas. John

...ist, >> I am a Speex supporter and user that would really like to know how much >> memory Speex uses to decode a 8kHz, 16kHz and 32kHz (primarily the 8kHz) >> and is it possible to use a 1kBytes of RAM to decode a 8kHz stream? (I >> was thinking of the possibility of using a ATmega168 to decode Speex) > > Speex would fit in 8 kB RAM, maybe in 4 kB, but certainly not in 1 kB. > Sorry. > > Jean-Marc > ok, that is not good for my plans... Is there any thing in the the 8kB of RAM that is always the same (lookup table etc.) or did you already think of that?...

...uspect that machine is very different than the one you are currently examining. shap On Mon, 2008-05-19 at 12:38 -0600, John Regehr wrote: > Anyone else interested in an AVR backend? > > If so, for what members of the AVR family? If we do a port, likely it'll > support only the ATmegas. > > John > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev

Hello Mailing List, I am a Speex supporter and user that would really like to know how much memory Speex uses to decode a 8kHz, 16kHz and 32kHz (primarily the 8kHz) and is it possible to use a 1kBytes of RAM to decode a 8kHz stream? (I was thinking of the possibility of using a ATmega168 to decode Speex) //P?r, Sweden

...lookup > table etc.) or did you already think of that? I told you the RAM requirements. The lookup tables are already counted as ROM. Basically, just one decoded frame already takes 320 bytes. Add the excitation memory and you've already blown the budget. > I'm curios since the > ATmega168 got 16kB of Flash that is as fast as the RAM (I think the chip > is made so it limits its maximum speed to the slowest memory, flash. it > also has some EEPROM besides the SRAM). It's not clear the code size + lookups would fit in the flash anyway. > Ps. ATmega spec: > FLASH: 1...

John Regehr wrote: > I ask since gcc is causing significant pain for one of my students. He > could switch over to LLVM but only after writing a backend for AVR (8-bit > RISC). An AVR backend would be very cool. AVR is way more compiler friendly than PIC, so it should not be all that difficult either. The only hitch is that in the MCU world people expect to be able to write interrupt

...erent than the one you are currently examining. > > > shap > On Mon, 2008-05-19 at 12:38 -0600, John Regehr wrote: >> Anyone else interested in an AVR backend? >> >> If so, for what members of the AVR family? If we do a port, likely it'll >> support only the ATmegas. >> >> John >> _______________________________________________ >> LLVM Developers mailing list >> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu >> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev > > ______________________________________________...

It is really cool that LLVM has a backend for PIC now. I wonder if someone could comment on the suitability of LLVM for 8-bit and 16-bit MCUs? Is there significant impedance mismatch or is it relatively easy to get good object code for these platforms? (I.e. roughly comparable to gcc4?) I ask since gcc is causing significant pain for one of my students. He could switch over to LLVM but