[En-Nut-Discussion] Which is the latest greatest branch
harald.kipp at egnite.de
Thu Aug 23 10:48:49 CEST 2012
On 23.08.2012 00:09, Ole Reinhardt wrote:
>>> Splitting out M4 would nearly be only code duplication, only when somebody
>>> cares for FPU-aware threads things should go in a seperate directory.
>> That's why I voted for using ARM architectures as directory names, not marketing names.
> What about renaming it just to "cortex"?
> I mainly agree to your proposal to rename it to the arm architecture
> names. But most end-users won't understand it. So cortex is more
> commonly used.
We then have arm and cortex, with
arm7tdmi (armv4) and arm9e (armv5) in arm
cm3 (armv7) in cortex.
Later we will add
cm0 (armv6) in cortex
but the same architecture
arm11 (armv6) in arm
just because it is not called cortex.
Finally we will add arm64 (armv8) in arm. However, if ARM Holdings decides to name it cortex-ng for marketing purposes, then we move it to cortex. If they call it nut, then we are busted.
I contributed almost nothing to the cm3 port, so it's not my decision. But it's my strong opinion, that using
arch/arm_v4 for arm7tdmi
arch/arm_v5 for arm9e
arch/arm_v7 for arm-cortex-m3 and arm-cortex-m4
is the best way to handle existing and upcoming ARM architectures. It would make sense to additionally use
for items common to all ARMs and
for items common to all ARM-Cortex.
End users will rarely dive into nut/arch. Developers may have a short look at
P.S. Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam
More information about the En-Nut-Discussion