PowerPC architecture: Which processors have 8 BAT registers?

[Peter Dufault]

On Mar 1, 2005, at 3:56 PM, Till Straumann wrote:

>
> PLEASE don't - this will get us into the multilib swamp again.
> Consider a run-time check for CPU version that generates an error
> if the CPU executing the code doesn't support the additional BATs.
>
> AFAIK, the init-code testing the CPU version would also have to
> enable the additional bats, wouldn't it?

I don't know, I don't know about BATs yet.

>

I thought about a run-time check, but I didn't know the multilib swamp 
had been drained yet.  In making changes to shared projects I try to 
match the existing code base.  And back in the multilib swamp, there's 
the advantage of link time errors and small code for small targets with 
conditional compilation.

In my own code I usually invert the conditional test so that more and 
more definitions result in smaller code, and no definitions results in 
the largest and most general.  That's not the way RTEMS is currently, 
but the approach is only a mind-set.

If the new code was conditional but added run time tests would you be 
happy(er)?

Peter

Peter Dufault
HD Associates, Inc.