From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
To: Nick Duffek <nsd@redhat.com>
Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com, cagney@redhat.com, dje@transmeta.com, taylor@cygnus.com, kevinb@cygnus.com, msnyder@cygnus.com, jimb@cygnus.com, per@bothner.com, eliz@delorie.com
Subject: Re: Harvard proposal
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 13:22:00 -0000
Message-id: <3A899B67.4A37902E@cygnus.com>
References: <200102102025.f1AKPtS11061@rtl.cygnus.com>
X-SW-Source: 2001-02/msg00141.html

Nick Duffek wrote:

> The Problem
> ===========
> 
> GDB handles Harvard architectures by mapping instruction and data spaces
> onto a single byte address space.
> 
> For example, d10v-tdep.c performs the following mapping:
>   data: 0x2000000 + addr
>   insn: 0x1000000 + (addr << 2)
> 
> The mapping is user-visible, which I think is problematic because:

Just FYI, while the mapping is user visible it is also very entrenched. 
BFD, which doesn't handle segmentation either, uses that ``cannonical''
address form in its linker scripts and relocations.

	Andrew