[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Aha!



On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Pete Popov wrote:

> The mips1/2/3/4 are different mips instruction set architectures.  
> Processors that are mips4 compliant, for example, also have instruction 
> compatibility with the previous  architectures -- mips1/2/3.  Thus, mips3 
> doesn't mean R4000, but the R4000 might be a mips3 cpu (the 5000 is 
> mips4).
> 
> It would be nice to get gcc/binutils fixed for all ISAs, but if you have 
> to target a certain ISA, start with mips3.  Most newer processor are 
> either mips3 or mips4 cpus, so that would be of the most benefit to 
> mips-linux, imho.

That's what I figured.  The problem is, the mips3 target is a 64-bit one,
which may affect the mips port in general.  Since this port is in it's
infancy (from my observation of packages available and condition of the
toolchain), I'm wondering if it might be better off to start the mips64
port now and go from there (at least on my end).  Once the mips1 ISA is
better supported, then continuing the 32-bit mips port will be feasible,
from a toolchain standpoint.

> If you're interested in mips in general, the best book out there, in my 
> opinion, is 'See Mips Run' by Dominic Sweetman.

That's pretty much what I gathered.  Is it good from a standpoint of
understanding the ISAs and the differences in the MIPS family from an asm 
point of view?

C



Reply to: