On Saturday 27 February 2010, Mariano Alvira wrote:
> 
> > I don't entirely "get" these chips which execute code from large SRAMs
> > instead of from NOR flash ... I had understood that the SRAMs use more
> > power than the NOR flash, so that most microcontrollers minimized the
> > quantity of SRAM they included (even at the cost of annoying the folk
> > writing code that might like more SRAM).
> 
> Yeah, after working with it I actually really like just running out of
> RAM. You don't have to flash everytime to test something.

Another option is to provide both "enough SRAM" *and* much flash.  :)

Of course, that still costs extra power.  Which can be OK on
development boards where the power budget doesn't much matter.


> Also your 
> "code space" is limitless if you come up with an elf loader or
> some other kind of swapping/virtual memory thing (no MMU though).

But in practice, most of that code is read-only and therefore may as
well live in NOR flash so you can execute-in-place.  And not *NEED*
to come up with some kind of segment loader.

 
> Also you get to make the tradeoff between code/data. No more of these
> 128KB flash things with only 4KB of SRAM. Now you get 96KB of SRAM ---
> and you can slice it up however you want.

No question that 4K isn't much R/W memory to pair up with 128K flash.
The 32-bit processors I've looked at which have 128 tend to not be
that parsimonious ... 32K (or more) is a bit more typical there.
_______________________________________________
Openocd-development mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development

Reply via email to