SPRUIY8 October   2024 F29H850TU , F29H859TU-Q1 , TMS320C28341 , TMS320C28342 , TMS320C28343 , TMS320C28343-Q1 , TMS320C28344 , TMS320C28345 , TMS320C28346 , TMS320C28346-Q1

 

  1.   1
  2.   Abstract
  3.   Trademarks
  4. 1Introduction
  5. 2C28 to C29 CPU Migration
    1. 2.1 Use Cases
    2. 2.2 Key Differences
    3. 2.3 Source Code Migration
      1. 2.3.1 C/C++ Source Code
        1. 2.3.1.1 Pragmas and Attributes
        2. 2.3.1.2 Macros
        3. 2.3.1.3 Intrinsics
        4. 2.3.1.4 Inline assembly
        5. 2.3.1.5 Keywords
        6. 2.3.1.6 Data Type Differences
        7. 2.3.1.7 Tooling support for Migration
      2. 2.3.2 Assembly Language Source Code
    4. 2.4 Toolchain Migration
      1. 2.4.1 Compiler
      2. 2.4.2 Linker
      3. 2.4.3 CCS Project Migration
  6. 3CLA to C29 CPU Migration
    1. 3.1 Use Cases
    2. 3.2 Key Differences
    3. 3.3 Source Code Migration
      1. 3.3.1 C/C++ Source Code
        1. 3.3.1.1 Data Type Differences
        2. 3.3.1.2 Migrating CLAmath.h Functions and Intrinsics
        3. 3.3.1.3 Migrating C28 and CLA to the Same C29 CPU
        4. 3.3.1.4 Migrating C28 and CLA to Different C29 CPUs
      2. 3.3.2 Assembly Language Source Code
    4. 3.4 Toolchain Migration
  7. 4References

2.3.1 C/C++ Source Code

One of the key concerns when porting platforms is for the order of memory accesses to be maintained, which would be the case since the C28 and C29 CPU pipelines have the same sequence of steps. However, there are some key differences that impact C/C++ source code that are discussed below. The C28 compiler supports some C/C++ extensions that the C29 compiler does not.