Hi!
My STM32F207 behave funny when i "blx r3" from 0x800'0344 (FLASH) to 0x870 (lower 112KiB SRAM mapped to 0x0):
It seems to ignore the first 4 bytes of instructions... When i insert 4 nops at 0x870 (or "DSB();ISB();"), then everything works as expected:
int main() {
{ dbgb[0]=0xAFFE0000; asm("nop\n nop\n nop\n nop"); }
{ dbgb[19]=__SP(); for (u32 i=0; i<16; i++) dbgb[i]=0xABBA0000|i; }
{ dbgb[8]=__get_MSP(); dbgb[10]=__get_PSP(); dbgb[12]=__SP(); }
{ dbgb[0]=0xAFFEABBA; bla(); dbgb[1]=0xAFFEBEEB; }
{ dbgb[9]=__get_MSP(); dbgb[11]=__get_PSP(); dbgb[13]=__SP(); reset(); return 0; }
init();
if (!mainrptver(0)) reset();
SET_BIT(SCB->SCR,SCB_SCR_SLEEPONEXIT_Msk);
__WFI();
}
void Reset_Handler() { dbgb[16]=__get_MSP(); main(); }
the code in the flash is this (P is a u32* to 0x2000'0000):
SYSCFG->MEMRMP = (0b11 << SYSCFG_MEMRMP_MEM_MODE_Pos); __DSB(); __ISB(); // map first 112KiB of SRAM to 0x0
__set_MSP(P[0]); __DSB(); __ISB(); // set stack pointer from app's ((u32*)g_pfnVectors)[0]
void (*app)() = (void(*)()) P[1]; // get address of app's reset ISR from app's ((u32*)g_pfnVectors)[1]
SCB->VTOR = (u32)0x0; __DSB(); __ISB(); // app's &g_pfnVectors is always @ 0x0
app(); // jump into the freshly mapped code segment in order to use ICode bus by leaving slow System bus
for (;;) { __DSB(); __ISB(); __WFI(); }
the disassembly:
8000326: f383 8808 msr MSP, r3
800032a: f3bf 8f4f dsb sy
800032e: f3bf 8f6f isb sy
8000332: 2100 movs r1, #0
8000334: 4a1e ldr r2, [pc, #120] ; (80003b0 <main+0xf0>)
8000336: 4b1f ldr r3, [pc, #124] ; (80003b4 <main+0xf4>)
8000338: 681b ldr r3, [r3, #0]
800033a: 6091 str r1, [r2, #8]
800033c: f3bf 8f4f dsb sy
8000340: f3bf 8f6f isb sy
8000344: 4798 blx r3
00000870 <Reset_Handler>:
870: f3ef 8208 mrs r2, MSP
874: 4b01 ldr r3, [pc, #4] ; (87c <Reset_Handler+0xc>)
876: 641a str r2, [r3, #64] ; 0x40
878: f7ff bfa2 b.w 7c0 <main>
87c: 2001c000 andcs ip, r1, r0
After the "reset();" dbg[16..19] is:
2001C040: E000ED00 00000000 00000000 2001BFE8 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000
Why is that? Are there similar traps with executing from SRAM?
Thx.
Bye
