RFC: Kill the gen405 BSP?

Joel Sherrill joel.sherrill at oarcorp.com
Fri Dec 14 18:32:19 UTC 2007

Thomas Doerfler wrote:
> Hello,
> some years we were supporting (more or less) two different exception
> schemes for PowerPC. An hour ago I decided to kill the HEAS403 BSP,
> which was based on a PPC403GA/GCX CPU, since the board is no longer
> available and I am not aware of anybody who uses this BSP.
> The next candidate to kill would be the
> gen405
> BSP. It is the last one supporting the old exception handling code, and
> removing it will simplify the PPC support.
> Remeber, that the PPC405 CPU is still activily supported in the "virtex"
> BSP, so 405 support will not be gone, when the gen405 is removed.
Oh...  I didn't realize the virtex BSP was effectively a replacement
for gen405.
> So, when nobody complaints 'til the end of the year, I will remove the
> gen405 in January 2008.
> Speak up NOW or stay silent :-)
I trust you.  Kill it.  Same comment on Wiki page update.

After this is done, Ralf.. how hard will it be to scrub
the tree and tools of any knowledge of old vs new exceptions?

After that can we all agree to never again use the phrases
old and new exceptions?  I have started calling them
Simple Vectored and PIC Interrupt Models.  The choice
of which to use is based upon what type of interrupt
vectoring model is offered by a CPU architecture.

After that, I am open to a name cleanup phase if there
is a desire to have better names for the PIC Interrupt
Model API.

> wkr,
> Thomas.

More information about the users mailing list