From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6871 invoked by alias); 8 Jan 2010 00:45:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 6854 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Jan 2010 00:45:13 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from p12018-ipbffx02marunouchi.tokyo.ocn.ne.jp (HELO mail.pizzafactory.jp) (222.147.75.18) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 00:45:09 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.pizzafactory.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83A8A590ED29; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:45:11 +0900 (JST) Received: from mail.pizzafactory.jp ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (ldap.monami-software.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1GoMp0+e13Bh; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:45:10 +0900 (JST) Received: from [192.168.0.9] (unknown [192.168.0.9]) by mail.pizzafactory.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD0C0590ED1D; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:45:10 +0900 (JST) Subject: Re: Can't set architecture to m32c on m32c-elf-gdb. Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Masaki Muranaka In-Reply-To: <201001080007.o0807Aik022372@greed.delorie.com> Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2010 00:45:00 -0000 Cc: nickc@redhat.com, drow@false.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org, binutils@sourceware.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <40E7AA99-A079-465F-B6E7-64862E303065@monami-software.com> References: <20081203140802.GA6965@caradoc.them.org> <50B2818F-7217-4D63-ABE8-19E444FE9A40@monami-software.com> <4B3C9784.1040309@redhat.com> <21F11493-3DE3-41FA-97D5-B539B54259A2@monami-software.com> <4B44A991.4010101@redhat.com> <271DFD02-74A7-4296-8253-AF4E24A38ADA@monami-software.com> <4B460270.5060808@redhat.com> <440A363D-401D-45C2-ADCB-B80AF3B3048D@monami-software.com> <201001072244.o07Mintk025541@greed.delorie.com> <55B67174-01F1-4A30-B65B-32A10B0EC7EB@monami-software.com> <201001080007.o0807Aik022372@greed.delorie.com> To: DJ Delorie X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-01/txt/msg00154.txt.bz2 Hello DJ, Hmm, it's possible a matter of degree... Talking about that cpu-m32c.c. In case you try to support R32C target, where target_info for R32C should b= e placed in? There are two strategy. One is to create cpu-r32c.c, The another is to append to cpu-m32c.c I have no objection about Nick's patch in case we will adopt the former. But I think it's better the latter since Renesas regards R32C as M16C famil= y. On 2010/01/08, at 9:07, DJ Delorie wrote: >=20 >> Yes some series cores are already shipped it and some are still >> planning. I didn't say R32C is same as M32C. But I think their >> register sets and periherals are quite similar. And Renesas says >> R32C is the high end model of M16C/M32C series, right? >=20 > Right, but r32c isn't a "type of m32c" - it's a sibling to m32c, much > like m32c is a sibling to m16c. The register set is similar, but not > quite the same, and the instruction set is similar, but not quite the > same, etc. >=20 >> I agree RX is completely different opcode/registers from M16C >> family. ("RX is a step up from R32C. " is similar to "SH-1/2 is a >> step up from H8") So I have no view about RX supports on GNU chains. >=20 > RX shares many peripherals and electrical configurations with > m32c/r32c though. >=20