There are different symbols for statements (processes) and function calls in flowcharts. When I have a statement which assigns the return value of a function to a variable, how can I show it in a flowchart? Should I show it as a process or a function (i.e. a plain rectangle or a rectangle with stripes)?
q = myFunction(x,y);
From Flowchart Symbols Defined:
A Predefined Process symbol is a marker for another process step or series of process flow steps that are formally defined elsewhere. This shape commonly depicts sub-processes (or subroutines in programming flowcharts). If the sub-process is considered "known" but not actually defined in a process procedure, work instruction, or some other process flowchart or documentation, then it is best not to use this symbol since it implies a formally defined process.
Given
q = myFunction(x,y);
Use a Predefined Process symbol, if myFunction is formally defined elsewhere; otherwise use a Process symbol.
Related
I'm trying to pass a parameter between a Fortran main program and a subroutine. However for some reason a different value is obtained in the subroutine. I am using common blocks.
program main
nzcur=1
write(*.*)"nzcur in main",nzcur
call hit
subroutine hit
common/part/nzcur
write(*,*)"nzcur in hit",nzcur; pause
end
end program
I would expect nzcur=1 but I get nzcur=0.
I think it could be a data type mismatch as I do not define it, only as a common block.
As noted in the comments, the correct learning response to this question is to avoid using common blocks to have access to variables from other scopes. In writing code in the modern era there are far better ways (more later).
Fortunately, however, we can look at this question in terms of "how do I understand what is happening with this common block?". Such a question is useful to those unfortunate programmers trying to understand old (or badly written new) code.
In considering the program of the question one should note that several corrections are required to have compilable code (with different possible approaches). The errors there are not directly relevant to the discussion.
In the subroutine
subroutine hit
common/part/nzcur
write(*,*)"nzcur in hit",nzcur; pause
end
we have a named common block called part, with one numeric storage unit which contains the integer variable nzcur (thanks to implicit typing).
In the question there is clearly the expectation that the variable nzcur in this common block accesses some other variable called nzcur and that this other variable is the one in the main program called nzcur. This is not correct.
nzcur in the subroutine is associated only with the first numeric storage unit of any other common block named part. The association is not based on named or location in the common block definition.
In the program of the question, there is no other common block called part; nzcur of the subroutine is not associated with anything else. It is certainly not associated with a variable not in a common block.
Because of this lack of association, the variable is not defined by the time the write statement references it. Again, the definition of the variable in the main program does not affect the definition of the local variable in the subroutine.
To "correct" the association, it will be necessary to put the variable nzcur of the main program in the correct location in a common block named part (in the main program).
To answer the question of "how do I set the value of nzcur in the subroutine without using common blocks?", refer to other questions such as this one.
AVR g++ has a pointer size of 16 bits. However, my particular chip (the ATMega2560) has 256 KB of RAM. To support this, the compiler automatically generates trampoline sections in the same section of ROM as the current executing code that then contains the extended assembly code to jump into high memory or back. In order for trampolines to be generated, you must take the address of something that sits in high memory.
In my scenario, I have a bootloader that I have written sitting in high memory. The application code needs to be able to call a function in the bootloader. I know the address of this function and need to be able to directly address it by hard-coding the address in my code.
How can I get the compiler/linker to generate the appropriate trampoline for an arbitrary address?
Compiler and linker will only generate trampoline code when the far address is a symbolic address rather than a literal constant number already in code. something like (assuming the address you want to jump to is 0x20000).
extern void (*farfun)() = 0x20000;
farfun ();
Will definitely not work, it doesn't cause the linker to do anything because the address is already resolved.
You should be able to inject the symbol address in the linker command line like so:
extern void farfun ();
farfun ();
compiling "normally" and linking with
-Wl,--defsym,farfun=0x20000
I think it's clear that you need to make sure yourself that something sensible sits at farfun.
You will most probably also need --relax.
EDIT
Never tried this myself, but maybe:
You could probably try to store the function address in a table in high memory and declare it like this:
extern void (*farfunctable [10])();
(farfunctable [0])();
and use the very same linker command to resolve the external symbol (now your table at 0x20000 (in the bootloader) needs to look like this:
extern void func1();
extern void func2();
void ((*farfunctab [10])() = {
func1,
func2,....
};
I would recommend to put func1() ... func10() in a different module from farfunctab in order to make the linker know it has to generate trampolins.
I was planning on putting a dispatch struct (that is, a struct with function pointers to all the various functions). Your solution works well, but requires knowing all of the locations of all of the functions ahead of time. Is there a way to execute a function call to a far address that isn't known at compile time?
[...] My goal was to put the struct with pointers to the functions in a fixed location. That way, it would be a single thing that needed a fixed address rather than every external function.
So you have two applications, let's call them App and Boot, where Boot provides some functionalities that App wants to use. The following problems have to be addressed:
How to get addresses from Boot into App.
How to build a jump table for Boot.
Avoid constructs that will crash when App tries to use code from Boot, like: Using indirect calls or jumps, using static constructors or using static storage in Boot.
App uses Addresses of boot.elf directly
Linking with -Wl,-R,boot.elf
A simple way would be to just link app.elf against boot.elf be means of -Wl,-R,boot.elf. Option -R instructs the linker to use symbol values from the specified file without dragging any code. Problem is that there's no way to specify which symbols to use, for example this might lead to a situation where App uses libgcc functions from Boot.
Defining Symbols by means of -Wl,--defsym,symbol=value
A bit more control over which symbols are being defined can be implemented by following a specific naming convention. Suppose that all symbols from Boot that have "boot" in their name should be "exported", then you could just
> avr-nm -g boot.elf | grep ' T ' | awk '/boot/ { printf("--defsym %s=0x%s\n",$3,$1) }' > syms.opt
This prints global symbol values, and grep filters out symbols in the text section. awk then transforms lines like 00020102 T boot1 to lines like
--defsym boot1=0x00020102 which are written to an option file syms.opt. The option file can then be provided to the linker by means of -Wl,#syms.opt.
The advantage of an option file is that it is easier to provide than plain options in a build environment like make: app.elf would depend (amongst others) on syms.opt, which in turn would depend on boot.elf.
Defining Symbols in a Linker Script Snippet
An alternative would be to define the symbols in a linker script augmentation, which you would provide by means of -T syms.ld during link and which would contain
"boot1"=ABSOLUTE(0x00020102);
"boot2"=...
...
INSERT AFTER .text
Defining Symbols in an Assembly Module
Yet another way to define the symbols would be by means of an assembly module which contains definitions like .global boot1 together with boot1 = 0x00020102.
All these approaches have in common that all symbols must be defined, or otherwise the linker will throw an undefined symbol error. This means boot.elf must be available, and it does not matter whether just one symbol is undefined or whether dozends of symbols are undefined.
Let Boot provide a Dispatch Table
The problem with using boot.elf directly, like lined out in the previous section, is that it introduces a direct dependency. This means that if Boot is improved or refactored, then you'll also have to re-compile App each time, even if the interface did not change.
A solution is to let Boot provide a dispatch table whose position and layout are known ahead of time. Only when the interface itself changes, App will have to be rebuilt. Just refactoring Boot will not require to re-build App.
The Assembly Module with the Jump Table
As explained in the "Crash" section below, addresses in a dispatch table (and hence indirect jumps) won't work because EIND has a wrong value. Therefore, let's assume we have a table of JMPs to the desired Boot functions, like in an assembly module boot-table.sx that reads:
;;; Linker description file boot.ld locates input section .boot.table
;;; right after .vectors, hence the address of .boot_table will be
;;; text-section-start + _VECTORS_SIZE, where the latter is
;;; #define'd in <avr/io.h>.
;;; No "x" section flag so that the linker won't relax JMPs to RJMPs.
.section .boot.table,"a",#progbits
.global .boot_table
.type .boot_table,#object
boot_table:
jmp boot1
jmp boot2
.size boot_table, .-boot_table
In this example, we are going to locate the jump table right after .vectors, so that its location is known ahead of time. The respective symbol definitions in App's syms.opt will then read
--defsym boot1=0x20000+vectors_size+0*4
--defsym boot2=0x20000+vectors_size+1*4
provided Boot is located at 0x20000. Symbol vectors_size can be defined in a C/C++ module, here by abusing avr-gcc attribute "address":
#include <avr/io.h>
__attribute__((__address__(_VECTORS_SIZE)))
char vectors_size;
Locating the Jump Table
In order to locate input section .boot.table, we need an own linker description file, which you might already use for Boot anyways. We start with a linker script from avr-gcc installation at ./avr/lib/ldscripts/avr6.xn, copy it to boot.ld, and add the following 2 lines after vectors:
...
.text :
{
*(.vectors)
KEEP(*(.vectors))
*(.boot.table)
KEEP(*(.boot.table))
/* For data that needs to reside in the lower 64k of progmem. */
*(.progmem.gcc*)
...
Auto-Generating Boot's Jump Table Module and the Symbols for App
It's highly advisable to have an interface description used by both App and Boot, say common.h. Moreover, in order to keep Boot's boot-table.sx and App's syms.opt in sync with the interface, it's agood idea to auto-generate these two files from common.h. To that end, assume that common.h reads:
#ifndef COMMON_H
#define COMMON_H
#define EX __attribute__((__used__,__externally_visible__))
EX int boot1 /* #boot_table:0 */ (int);
EX int boot2 /* #boot_table:1 */ (void);
#endif /* COMMON_H */
For the matter of simplicity, let's assume that this is C code or the interfaces are extern "C" so that the symbols in source code match the assembly names, and there's no need to use mangled names. It' easy enough to generate boot-table.sx and syms.opt from common.h using the magic comments. The magic comment follows directly after the symbol, so a regex would retrieve the token left of the magic comment, something like Python:
# ... symbol /* #boot_table:index */...
pat = re.compile (r".*(\b\w+\b)\s*/\* #boot_table:(\d+) \*/.*")
for line in sys.stdin.readlines():
match = re.match (pat, line)
if match:
index = int (match.group(2))
symbol = match.group(1)
Output template for syms.opt would be something like:
asm_line = "--defsym {symbol}=0x20000+vectors_size+4*{index}\n"
Code that will crash
Using Boot code from App is subject to several restrictions:
Indirect Calls and Jumps
These will crash because the start addresses of App resp. Boot are in different 128KiB segments of flash. When the address of a code symbol is taken, the compiler does this per gs(symbol) which instructs the linker to generate a stub and resolve gs() to that stub in .trampolines if the target address is outside the 128KiB segment where the trampolines are located. An explanation of gs() can be found in this answer, there is however more to it: The startup code will effectively initialize
EIND = __vectors >> 17;
see gcrt1.S, the AVR-LibC bits of start-up code crt<device>.o. The compiler assumes EIND never changes during execution, see EIND and more than 128KiB of Flash in the GCC documentation.
This means code in Boot assumes EIND = 1 but is called with EIND = 0 and hence EICALL resp. EIJMP will target the wrong address. This means common code must avoid indirect calls and jumps, and should be compiled with -fno-jump-tables so that switch/case won't generate such tables.
This also implies that the dispatch table described above won't work if it would just held gs(symbol) entries, because App and Boot will disagree on EIND.
Data in Static Storage
If common Boot code is using data in static storage, the data might collide with App's static storage. One way out is to avoid static storage in respective parts of Boot and pass addresses to, say, some data buffer by means of pointer erguments of respective functions.
One could have completely separate RAM areas; one for Boot and one for App, but that would be a waste of RAM because the applications will never run at the same time.
Static Constructors
Boot's static constructors will be bypassed if App uses code from Boot. This includes:
C++ code in Boot that explicitly or implicitly generates such constructors.
C/C++ code in Boot that relies on __attribute__((__constructor__)) or code in section .initN which is supposed to run prior to main.
Start-up code that initializes static storage, EIND etc., which is also run by locating it in some .initN sections, but will be bypassed if App calls Boot code.
This question already has answers here:
Listing Unused Symbols
(2 answers)
Closed 7 years ago.
How do I detect function definitions which are never getting called and delete them from the file and then save it?
Suppose I have only 1 CPP file as of now, which has a main() function and many other function definitions (function definition can also be inside main() ). If I were to write a program to parse this CPP file and check whether a function is getting called or not and delete if it is not getting called then what is(are) the way(s) to do it?
There are few ways that come to mind:
I would find out line numbers of beginning and end of main(). I can do it by maintaining a stack of opening and closing braces { and }.
Anything after main would be function definition. Then I can parse for function definitions. To do this I can parse it the following way:
< string >< open paren >< comma separated string(s) for arguments >< closing paren >
Once I have all the names of such functions as described in (2), I can make a map with its names as key and value as a bool, indicating whether a function is getting called once or not.
Finally parse the file once again to check for any calls for functions with their name as in this map. The function call can be from within main or from some other function. The value for the key (i.e. the function name) could be flagged according to whether a function is getting called or not.
I feel I have complicated my logic and it could be done in a smarter way. With the above logic it would be hard to find all the corner cases (there would be many). Also, there could be function pointers to make parsing logic difficult. If that's not enough, the function pointers could be typedefed too.
How do I go about designing my program? Are a map (to maintain filenames) and stack (to maintain braces) the right data structures or is there anything else more suitable to deal with it?
Note: I am not looking for any tool to do this. Nor do I want to use any library (if it exists to make things easy).
I think you should not try to build a C++ parser from scratch, becuse of other said in comments that is really hard. IMHO, you'd better start from CLang libraries, than can do the low-level parsing for you and work directly with the abstract syntax tree.
You could even use crange as an example of how to use them to produce a cross reference table.
Alternatively, you could directly use GNU global, because its gtags command directly generates definition and reference databases that you have to analyse.
IMHO those two ways would be simpler than creating a C++ parser from scratch.
The simplest approach for doing it yourself I can think of is:
Write a minimal parser that can identify functions. It just needs to detect the start and ending line of a function.
Programmatically comment out the first function, save to a temp file.
Try to compile the file by invoking the complier.
Check if there are compile errors, if yes, the function is called, if not, it is unused.
Continue with the next function.
This is a comment, rather than an answer, but I post it here because it's too long for a comment space.
There are lots of issues you should consider. First of all, you should not assume that main() is a first function in a source file.
Even if it is, there should be some functions header declarations before the main() so that the compiler can recognize their invocation in main.
Next, function's opening and closing brace needn't be in separate lines, they also needn't be the only characters in their lines. Generally, almost whole C++ code can be put in a single line!
Furthermore, functions can differ with parameters' types while having the same name (overloading), so you can't recognize which function is called if you don't parse the whole code down to the parameters' types. And even more: you will have to perform type lists matching with standard convertions/casts, possibly considering inline constructors calls. Of course you should not forget default parameters. Google for resolving overloaded function call, for example see an outline here
Additionally, there may be chains of unused functions. For example if a() calls b() and b() calls c() and d(), but a() itself is not called, then the whole four is unused, even though there exist 'calls' to b(), c() and d().
There is also a possibility that functions are called through a pointer, in which case you may be unable to find a call. Example:
int (*testfun)(int) = whattotest ? TestFun1 : TestFun2; // no call
int testResult = testfun(paramToTest); // unknown function called
Finally the code can be pretty obfuscated with #define–s.
Conclusion: you'll probably have to write your own C++ compiler (except the machine code generator) to achieve your goal.
This is a very rough idea and I doubt it's very efficient but maybe it can help you get started. First traverse the file once, picking out any function names (I'm not entirely sure how you would do this). But once you have those names, traverse the file again, looking for the function name anywhere in the file, inside main and other functions too. If you find more than 1 instance it means that the function is being called and should be kept.
I use the Intel Visual Fortran. According to Chapmann's book, declaration of function type in the routine that calls it, is NECESSARY. But look at this piece of code,
module mod
implicit none
contains
function fcn ( i )
implicit none
integer :: fcn
integer, intent (in) :: i
fcn = i + 1
end function
end module
program prog
use mod
implicit none
print *, fcn ( 3 )
end program
It runs without that declaration in the calling routine (here prog) and actually when I define its type (I mean function type) in the program prog or any other unit, it bears this error,
error #6401: The attributes of this name conflict with those made accessible by a USE statement. [FCN] Source1.f90 15
What is my fault? or if I am right, How can it be justified?
You must be working with a very old copy of Chapman's book, or possibly misinterpreting what it says. Certainly a calling routine must know the type of a called function, and in Fortran-before-90 it was the programmer's responsibility to ensure that the calling function had that information.
However, since the 90 standard and the introduction of modules there are other, and better, ways to provide information about the called function to the calling routine. One of those ways is to put the called functions into a module and to use-associate the module. When your program follows this approach the compiler takes care of matters. This is precisely what your code has done and it is not only correct, it is a good approach, in line with modern Fortran practice.
association is Fortran-standard-speak for the way(s) in which names (such as fcn) become associated with entities, such as the function called fcn. use-association is the way implemented by writing use module in a program unit, thereby making all the names in module available to the unit which uses module. A simple use statement makes all the entities in the module known under their module-defined names. The use statement can be modified by an only clause, which means that only some module entities are made available. Individual module entities can be renamed in a use statement, thereby associating a different name with the module entity.
The error message you get if you include a (re-)declaration of the called function's type in the calling routine arises because the compiler will only permit one declaration of the called function's type.
I have some global variables (classes) that as I understand have created before main() call. I need some technique to add data to a List of something either global or as member of that class from any part of my code and it have to be filled before Linker. To use it inside globally created classes. Is it possible? I did not find any similar solution or even question, so any help will be appreciated.
Detailed example:
I've have singleton class which has a variable that was filled in the constructor. All other classes use data from the class at run time someone early someone later. Singleton class is created at the begin of main function. I am using singleton in different projects, data that it has mostly universal for all projects and modules except special flag which should show requirement for this module. If singleton throw exception program exits and we know it at the first steps of execution because singleton creates at first lines of the main. So singleton has a lot of universal data for all projects but I need to add flags to point for singleton which data is required for each module. I have created template for main so for each project I have the same main with just simple define PROJECT_NAME later I add .cpp to the project and they have to register which data is required and which not.
This explanation not looks like perfect, if it is not understandable don't hesitate to say it I will organize it more deliberately.
Edited:
I'm still looking for solution in the Internet, and found constexpr it looks like what I need, but at this moment it is not supported by all compilers, is there some workaround ?
First step is to not use global variables, but instead use static variables within a global function. The first time the function is called the variable will be initialized and then have the function return a reference to the varaible.
my_class& instnace() {
static my_class i;
return i;
}
A list example:
std::list<my_class>& global_list() {
static std::list<my_class> m; return m;
}
static int x = []()->int{ global_list().push_back(my_class); return 0;}();
If you want to accomplish what you want from different modules , one of the way is to have things done is some sort of callback function when your dll is loaded.
One windows it is DLLMain.
An optional entry point into a dynamic-link library (DLL). When the
system starts or terminates a process or thread, it calls the
entry-point function for each loaded DLL using the first thread of the
process. The system also calls the entry-point function for a DLL when
it is loaded or unloaded using the LoadLibrary and FreeLibrary
functions.
On other platforms with gcc you can get by the [attribute constructor]
constructor The constructor attribute causes the function to be called
automatically before execution enters main (). Similarly, the
destructor attribute causes the function to be called automatically
after main () has completed or exit () has been called. Functions with
these attributes are useful for initializing data that will be used
implicitly during the execution of the program. These attributes are
not currently implemented for Objective-C.
Warning
It is very easy to shoot yourself in the foot with this method. At least on windows that are lot of things you cannot do in the dll entry point. Please read your compiler/os documentation to see what the limitations are.