Patch from Robin Kirkham <Robin.Kirkham@mlb.dmt.csiro.au> to distinguish

between CPU32 and CPU32+ cores.  Commentary follows:

    Unfortunately c/src/exec/score/cpu/m68k/m68k.h incorrectly defines
    M68K_HAS_MISALIGNED for the plain old CPU32 (it is correct for the CPU32+).
    As a consequence, the recently-relocated m68k memcpy() may still attempt
    misaligned memory accesses.

    I suggest that until such time as egcs/gcc differentiates these cores
    that we invent a new preprocessor symbol, RTEMS__mcpu32p__ for this
    purpose, on the assumption that egcs may one day grow a -mcpu32+ option
    which will define a __mcpu32p__ symbol (whether this option would also
    define __mcpu32__ is yet to be resolved).

    BSPs that have a CPU32+ (like gen68360) would for the time being define
    RTEMS__mcpu32p__ using -D. The symbol is `RTEMS__mcpu32p__' because
    symbols of the form __xxx__ should only be defined by the compiler
    itself.

    Note that the patch tests for RTEMS__mcpu32p__ *before* __mcpu32__, since
    __mcpu32__ is still defined for the CPU32+. It does not change the
    gen68360 BSP.

    An aside:
    Note that in egcs-1.0.3a, the option -m68332 is identical to -mcpu32,
    except it defines __mc68332__ as well as __mcpu32__. This is only
    for the sake of compatibility. The story with -m68302 is similar;
    it defines __mc68302__ and __mc68000__. In my opinion these options
    are depreciated and ought to be avoided in RTEMS.

0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions