This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the eCos project.
Re: Cortex M3 architecture
On 2008-09-01, firstname.lastname@example.org <email@example.com> wrote:
> Andrew Lunn wrote:
>>> I wonder if the other Cortex variants (A8, A9, R4, M1) should
>>> be considered for porting from the beginning. My focus is
>>> clearly on the M3, but if anyone is willing to work on the
>>> other variants this should be considered now.
>> Have you seen any documents which compares/contrasts the
>> different Cortex variants. Before answering your question it
>> is necessary to know how similar/different the different
>> variants are.
> No I haven't really. All I know is that the variants all have
> very different application profiles. A series being mostly for
> complex OS and applications, R series for more complex
> embedded applications and the M series for deeply embedded
> applications. A & R also support normal Thumb and ARM
> instructions. Perhaps someone else can give some insight?
I would think that Thumb2 processors like the M3 would need to
be a different architecture than ARM. It's a different
instruction set -- isn't that what defines an architecture?
Whether the A and R series would fit best under an ARM
architecture or a Thumb2 architecture, I won't hazard a guess
(I've only studied the M3).
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss