Subject: Re: NetBSD/hpcarm snap code
To: Jason R Thorpe <email@example.com>
From: Lord Isildur <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 02/16/2001 13:47:20
just because somethign is on the chip physially doesnt mean it is not a
peripheral arhitecturally. A KA690 VAX processor has an NVAX processor but
also has an onboard ethernet and CI adaptor- are those part of the
processor or are they peripherals. I think they should be classified as
peripherlas, or as particular models of a processor within the same arch.
On Fri, 16 Feb 2001, Jason R Thorpe wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 16, 2001 at 06:36:51PM +0000, Ben Harris wrote:
> > I think calling it "consensus" is optimistic, though the majority of
> > people seemed to be in favour of that kind of move. In any case, I'm not
> > sure that on-chip peripherals really count as part of the ARM
> > CPU. They're more equivalent to the IOMD or Footbridge, whose support
> > code would presumably live in the riscpc and cats directories
> > respectively.
> No, I don't think so. If it's on-chip, then any system that has that
> CPU is going to have those devices -- and they really are part of that
> CPU chip. E.g. an "hpcarm" port is going to be separate from a port
> to a random eval board that happens to have an SA11x0 on it, because it
> could have different devices on it -- but the on-chip "peripherals" really
> are common, due to the CPU.
> -- Jason R. Thorpe <email@example.com>