Displaying 8 results from an estimated 8 matches for "atmegas".
2008 May 19
3
[LLVMdev] LLVM on small MCUs?
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
2008 Feb 01
2
Speex memory usage?
Jean-Marc Valin skrev:
> Ghost Wolf a ?crit :
>> 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)
2008 May 19
0
[LLVMdev] LLVM on small MCUs?
...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
2008 Feb 01
2
Speex memory usage?
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
2008 Feb 01
0
Speex memory usage?
> 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?
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
2008 May 19
0
[LLVMdev] LLVM on small MCUs?
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
2008 May 19
1
[LLVMdev] LLVM on small MCUs?
...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
>
> _______________________________________________...
2008 May 19
5
[LLVMdev] LLVM on small MCUs?
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