[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: ppc multlibs and BSP removal was Re: powerpc altivec support
- Date: 09 Feb 2005 18:00:41 +0300
- From: Sergei Organov <osv at topconrd dot ru>
- Subject: Re: ppc multlibs and BSP removal was Re: powerpc altivec support
"Joel Sherrill <joel@OARcorp.com>" <joel.sherrill@OARcorp.com> writes:
> I think old exception process is now done to 4xx and a few 6xx BSPs. I
> know of one old exception 6xx BSP which is in use and needs to be
> updated. They have offered to do the conversion but that project has
> been up to its eyeballs the past 6 months and has barely made
> deadlines close enough to keep managment happy on required tasks. If
> someone can mechanically update it to the new exception model, I will
> be happy to merge that and kill the 6xx BSPs. I might even be willing
> to consider killing all the old exception 6xx BSPs except that and
> quit building it for a while.
Well, I use old exception processing for my own MPC509, MPC56x, and
MPC8270 BSPs. I don't in fact care about multilib variants provided
old exception processing support code remains in the source tree.
In general, I consider multilib support in RTEMS to be too much overhead
for an end-user that probably has to deal with 1-2 processor variants
total. For example, I use single-lib gcc for all the above processor
variants, and 3 BSPs total.
BTW, I'd wish to switch to *a new* exception processing, but
unfortunately *the new* exception processing is a mess, -- just notice
how much of similar code every BSP using it has. There are other weak
points about this "new" exception processing that make it a step back
for me even compared to the "old" one.