On 2008-09-01, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andrew Lunn wrote: >>> I wonder if the other Cortex variants (A8, A9, R4, M1) should >>> be considered for porting from the beginning. My focus is >>> clearly on the M3, but if anyone is willing to work on the >>> other variants this should be considered now. >> >> Have you seen any documents which compares/contrasts the >> different Cortex variants. Before answering your question it >> is necessary to know how similar/different the different >> variants are. > > No I haven't really. All I know is that the variants all have > very different application profiles. A series being mostly for > complex OS and applications, R series for more complex > embedded applications and the M series for deeply embedded > applications. A & R also support normal Thumb and ARM > instructions. Perhaps someone else can give some insight?
I would think that Thumb2 processors like the M3 would need to be a different architecture than ARM. It's a different instruction set -- isn't that what defines an architecture? Whether the A and R series would fit best under an ARM architecture or a Thumb2 architecture, I won't hazard a guess (I've only studied the M3). -- Grant -- Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss
