Page 7 of 7
Re: COPRTHR 2 Discussion
Posted:
Thu Jun 16, 2016 3:18 pm
by jar
Nick,
Internally, it's performing DWORD moves (for performance). So if your data isn't a multiple of 8 bytes or 8-byte aligned, you may have problems. Obviously, you found a bug that should be fixed. A workaround is to pad your data and round up the size of the transfer.
Re: COPRTHR 2 Discussion
Posted:
Thu Jun 16, 2016 3:28 pm
by mjvbhaskar1000
Re: COPRTHR 2 Discussion
Posted:
Thu Jun 16, 2016 4:19 pm
by jar
Re: COPRTHR 2 Discussion
Posted:
Fri Jul 01, 2016 6:17 pm
by jar
A new resources and download page is up:
http://www.browndeertechnology.com/reso ... prthr2.htmThere is now real documentation. And the first official Beta (version 20160701) is available now from the link above.
I haven't used it yet...
Re: COPRTHR 2 Discussion
Posted:
Sun Jul 03, 2016 3:22 am
by nickoppen
I got it going last night. It's looking good and having some documentation is great.
From what I have tested so far it seems to be on par with the last pre-release. I'm not sure what code improvements have been made given that the release notes are more of an installation guide.
I sorted the problem I had with sending data to and getting it from the epiphany. My mistake. I didn't call coprthr_memptr().
Re: COPRTHR 2 Discussion
Posted:
Wed Jul 13, 2016 11:31 am
by nickoppen
Browndeer has added some more examples of coprthr-2 programs.
Have a look here:
Re: COPRTHR 2 Discussion
Posted:
Tue Jul 19, 2016 5:39 am
by nickoppen
Re: COPRTHR 2 Discussion
Posted:
Tue Jul 19, 2016 4:22 pm
by jar
nick,
From my understanding, you shouldn't compile it like that. In the past, everything was compiled with clcc, but COPRTHR-2 is trying to improve interaction with the existing tools (like e-gcc).
Try compiling timer.c with e-gcc and linking the resulting binary (timer.o) with your passCL.c, compiled with coprcc.
Make sense?
Re: COPRTHR 2 Discussion
Posted:
Wed Jul 20, 2016 6:35 am
by nickoppen
jar,
I'm producing a .o file with e-gcc but I'm getting problems when I try and link it to the .e32 file.
Given that this would be of marginal value I think I'll leave it.
Again, thanks for your help.
nick