This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: harvard architectures - the d10v
- To: Doug Evans <dje at transmeta dot com>
- Subject: Re: harvard architectures - the d10v
- From: David Taylor <taylor at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 16:18:07 -0500
- cc: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at cygnus dot com>, Kevin Buettner <kevinb at cygnus dot com>, Nick Duffek <nsd at cygnus dot com>, Michael Snyder <msnyder at cygnus dot com>, Jim Blandy <jimb at cygnus dot com>, GDB Discussion <gdb at sources dot redhat dot com>
From: Doug Evans <email@example.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 13:05:59 -0800 (PST)
Andrew Cagney writes:
> So a meta question, how should GDB behave when it comes to a harvard
Is "Harvard Architecture" really the best name for this?
Seems to me it includes only a small subset of the total set of
architectures that have multiple address spaces for different uses.
It could have multiple address spaces for a variety of reasons -- for
example, the Sony Playstation 2, if I recall correctly, has 5 total
processors in it of 2 (or is it 3?) different types. Each has its own
Are there issues people wish to discuss beyond the issues that arise
as a result of multiple address spaces?
> ``But the d10v is a hack''? So? The point of the d10v, wasn't to
> provide a reference implementation (anything but!) but rather to provide
> a vehicle through which a reference implementation could be developed.
I don't know that the d10v was all the good a reference implementation
or that one is even needed for the task at hand.