From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29407 invoked by alias); 18 May 2011 21:15:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 29398 invoked by uid 22791); 18 May 2011 21:15:44 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from hagrid.ecoscentric.com (HELO mail.ecoscentric.com) (212.13.207.197) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 18 May 2011 21:15:30 +0000 Received: from localhost (hagrid.ecoscentric.com [127.0.0.1]) by mail.ecoscentric.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DC1A151861B for ; Wed, 18 May 2011 22:15:29 +0100 (BST) Received: from mail.ecoscentric.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (hagrid.ecoscentric.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0Yhxp77G7Jky; Wed, 18 May 2011 22:15:25 +0100 (BST) From: bugzilla-daemon@bugs.ecos.sourceware.org To: ecos-patches@ecos.sourceware.org Subject: [Bug 1000819] Add support for Atmel AT91SAM9263 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: eCos X-Bugzilla-Component: Patches and contributions X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: markthetyke@4dv.net X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED X-Bugzilla-Priority: normal X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: john@dallaway.org.uk X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: In-Reply-To: References: X-Bugzilla-URL: http://bugs.ecos.sourceware.org/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 21:15:00 -0000 Message-Id: <20110518211525.503831518638@mail.ecoscentric.com> Mailing-List: contact ecos-patches-help@ecos.sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-patches-owner@ecos.sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-05/txt/msg00020.txt.bz2 Please do not reply to this email. Use the web interface provided at: http://bugs.ecos.sourceware.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1000819 --- Comment #29 from Mark Mumford 2011-05-18 22:15:19 BST --- Hi, I'm new here but I'm not averse to expressing my opinion and nobody else has weighed in yet, I have also done a couple of ports to an ARM7 and an ARM9 platform so I have spent time exploring the directory structure. In my opinion I would forget the tag AT91 this doesn't represent a variant in the ECOS sense as it includes 3 different processor architectures the ARM7, ARM9 and ARM Cortex-M. These are different architectures because first they have different instruction sets, second they have different pipeline, cache and bus configs. So the AT91SAM9 series use the variant ARM922EJ-S cpu. There are already a number of platforms under the hal/arm/arm9 directory. As such the AT91SAM9 series should be implemented as 4 separate platforms under this structure, although they probably be using common peripheral devices which may also be shared with the rest of the AT91 family. The AT91SAM7 series should be implemented under the hal/arm structure and the AT91SAM3 series under the hal/cortexm structure. Should the arm9 have been a separate architecture instead of a sub-architecture, who cares it's too late to change it now. The question I see is do we need to introduce a new set of devices for the AT91SAM9 series, only if there are significant enhancements or interoperability issues would be my humble opinion. The problem I see with supporting the SAM3 from the same IO package is that the peripheral bus structure usually implemented on cortex devices is not the same as the earlier models. Perhaps the IO package should be divided by peripheral bus structure AHB,AMBA etc. Okay that's enough from me. Mark M -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.ecos.sourceware.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.