Good day to all.

This is an incredibly newbie-type question, but I'm stumped.

I've been writing code in assembler for 'conventional' 12-bit-core=20
and 14-bit-core PIC chips for a LONG time now.  I've got a bunch of=20
code-writing techniques that make the whole process fairly painless.

These early PICs have only 4 RAM banks: zero through three.  I have=20
macros that deal with the MSB of the 7-bit address so that I get=20
Message 302 warnings only when I haven't properly set up the bank=20
bits.  These macros save me an awful lot of time when my fingers go=20
faster than my mind.

In part, these macros are:

     #define BB1(reg,bit) (reg^0x80),(bit)   ;bit in bank 1
     #define RB1(reg) (reg^0x80)             ;reg in bank 1
;usage is:  bcf     BB1(_SOMEBIT)
;usage is:  movwf   RB1(SOMEREG)

What happens is that MPASMWIN spits out a message 302 warning if I=20
don't use the BB1 or RB1 macro on a register that is in RAM bank 1 or=20
3.  Conversely, the assembler spits out a warning if use either macro=20
when I shouldn't be using the macro with a register that is in RAM bank 0 o=
r 2.

Like I mentioned above, these simple macros save me loads of time in=20
tracking down stupid banking errors.  Plus - I get completely empty=20
..ERR files - this helps reassure me that I've probably caught all the=20
RAM bank switching that is needed.

Now I'm starting a project with my very first enhanced PIC16=20
architecture PIC - the 12F1840.  This little sucker has 32 RAM banks=20
- and an easy way to actually set the bank bits (banksel and movlb).

But: now I get all these darned message 302 warnings about checking=20
to see if I actually did set the bank bits.

I *really* don't want to disable those warnings - they are a useful=20
troubleshooting tool.  What I'm wondering if anyone has techniques to=20
'mask' the message on a case-by-case basis.

In other words, I want to be able to do something like:

     movlw    b'00110011'
     banksel  SOMERAM
     movwf    SOMERAM

but do *SOMETHING* that persuades MPASMWIN that the RAM location is=20
really in RAM bank 0, so that I don't get the warning message.  Or:=20
do something that hides the warning, again, on a case-by-case basis.

I know that there are a LOT of people using these newer chips and I=20
was hoping that someone has a technique that hides the warning if the=20
bank bits have actually been diddled.

My first thought was to write a macro that invokes banksel, turns off=20
the warning, writes the RAM location, then turns the warning back=20
on.  Something along the lines of:

BS_movwf  macro arg
     banksel  arg
     errorlevel -302
     movwf  arg
     errorlevel 302
     endm

Usage would be:
     movlw    b'00110011'
     BS_movwf (SOMERAM)

Of course, I'll have to do this for all possible operations, which=20
seems tedious.

Any thoughts?

Many thanks!

dwayne

--=20
Dwayne Reid   <dwayner@planet.eon.net>
Trinity Electronics Systems Ltd    Edmonton, AB, CANADA
(780) 489-3199 voice          (780) 487-6397 fax
www.trinity-electronics.com
Custom Electronics Design and Manufacturing

--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.