mps32 was Re: upcoming snapshot and 4.6.2

[gregory.menke at gsfc.nasa.gov]

Ralf Corsepius writes:
 > On Tue, 2004-09-28 at 15:51, gregory.menke at gsfc.nasa.gov wrote:
 > > "Joel Sherrill <joel at OARcorp.com>" <joel.sherrill at OARcorp.com> writes:
 > >  > Jay Monkman wrote:
 > >  > > Can we get the MIPS32 support in? (I haven't checked lately, so maybe
 > >  > > it's alread in).
 > >  > > 
 > >  > 
 > >  > I don't know if it is in or not.  If it is very intrusive, it will
 > >  > have to go on the trunk.  But if it is mild and blessed (quickly)
 > >  > by you and Greg Menke, then it should be OK to go in.
 > 
 > Are you guys referring to the patches attached to PR601?
 > 
 > IMHO, with a couple of weeks ahead, I would not be opposed to adding
 > them to rtems-4-6-branch, but ATM, I think these patches are too
 > intrusive to be "rushed into 4.6" "last minute".

PR601 tested OK for me on the Mongoose & JMR3904 when I put submitted
it, but Jay has a couple more patches that I've been slacking off
on... ;) sorry about that.


 > >  > This is one on the edge since it technically is a new feature but
 > >  > I understand it is satisfying a number of users, doesn't require
 > >  > a tool upgrade, and is hopefully minor.
 > Hmm, I know too little about the mips to be sure.
 > 
 > The essential question to me is:
 > Is -mips32 compiled code compatible to -mips1 compiled code?
 > 

IIRC, the changes are principally #ifdefs to influence cpu_asm related
register stuff, not gcc code generation issues.  The mips32 question
arises infrequently enough that I keep forgetting the details.  I
think the upshot is -mips1 or -mips3 is still required to make gcc do
the right stuff, mips32 is there to force R4000 registers in cases
where they're required.  Anyone, please correct me if I'm
mis-remembering.

I'm working on it now, but I have to examine the diffs closely.  OTOH,
we do have the Mongoose hardware functional, so testing will be
straightforward.

Gregm