From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17205 invoked by alias); 8 Jan 2010 00:02:27 -0000 Received: (qmail 16567 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Jan 2010 00:02:25 -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 00:02:20 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.pizzafactory.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C7B4590EB02; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:02:24 +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 tnoB3bxtOJhU; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:02:23 +0900 (JST) Received: from [192.168.0.9] (unknown [192.168.0.9]) by mail.pizzafactory.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id E275A590EAFB; Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:02:23 +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: <201001072244.o07Mintk025541@greed.delorie.com> Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2010 00:02:00 -0000 Cc: nickc@redhat.com, drow@false.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org, binutils@sourceware.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <55B67174-01F1-4A30-B65B-32A10B0EC7EB@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> 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/msg00151.txt.bz2 Hello DJ, 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? 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. Thanks, On 2010/01/08, at 7:44, DJ Delorie wrote: > >> Renesas is planning to ship R32C series. > > They're already shipping it. It's as different from M32C as M32C is > from M16C (m16c/60 at least) - no opcode compatibility at all, aside > from a "passing resemblance" at the asm syntax level. > > M16C vs R8C is much closer; they differ only in two opcodes. M16C/80 > vs M32C/80 have the same architecture, but m32c has more opcodes. > > RX is a step up from R32C. Same peripherals, basically, but > completely different opcodes and register set. > -- Masaki Muranaka Monami software