BSPs for Potential Deprecation
Joel Sherrill <joel@OARcorp.com>
joel.sherrill at OARcorp.com
Thu Oct 28 20:54:24 UTC 2004
Jay Monkman wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 28, 2004 at 11:15:13AM -0500, Joel Sherrill <joel at OARcorp.com> wrote:
>>Ivica Mikec wrote:
>>>I would like to keep mips p4000 since it can be used for any MIPS32 port.
>>OK. Do you actually compile and link it? I am not as keen on getting
>>rid of this BSP as many others but it is a thorn because we never
>>seem to have the magic combination of gcc CPU arguments to make
>>them (p4600, p4650) link.
> Since we have a MIPS32 BSP ready to go in, is it worth keeping the
I get terribly confused with the differences in the various MIPS CPU
models so please bear with me.
Are the CPU models used by the p4000/p4600/p4650 BSP MIPS32 ones? I
thought they were the Orion's which are some older 64-bit embedded
MIPS variant. Is this what became known as MIPS32?
I am prone to say yes .. a functional MIPS32 BSP is better than
an Orion BSP no one has hardware for as long as they cover the same
class of CPUs. Some BSPs are for custom hardware and only serve
as examples/starting points for new BSPs.
So if you have a functioning MIPS32 BSP and I asked you to write
one for the ITD 4650, would it be of any use?
Joel Sherrill, Ph.D. Director of Research & Development
joel at OARcorp.com On-Line Applications Research
Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS Huntsville AL 35805
Support Available (256) 722-9985
More information about the users