From mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Fri Apr 8 22:51:56 2005 X-Original-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de Delivered-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de Subject: Re: [MiNT] MMU usage in MiNT, fork/mmap From: "Evan K. Langlois" To: MiNT Mailing List In-Reply-To: <1112971351.20002.9.camel@localhost> References: <1112841566.22639.7.camel@taro.coolrunningconcepts.com> <1112902227.31903.3.camel@taro.coolrunningconcepts.com> <1112907140.31903.16.camel@taro.coolrunningconcepts.com> <20050408081917.GA761@hysteria.sk> <1112971351.20002.9.camel@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Cool Running Concepts Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 15:48:07 -0500 Message-Id: <1112993288.31903.56.camel@taro.coolrunningconcepts.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - esc14.midphase.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - fishpool.com X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - CoolRunningConcepts.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Errors-To: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi X-original-sender: Evan@CoolRunningConcepts.com Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-Id: X-List-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at relay.boerde.de X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on relay.boerde.de X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.9 tagged_above=-50.5 required=7.0 tests=AWL, BAYES_00 X-Spam-Level: On Fri, 2005-04-08 at 10:42 -0400, Mark Duckworth wrote: > OR you could cross compile on a pc? I'm actually working on getting a more up to date cross-compiler going. I'm just having some issues with what I believe to be a binutils issue. The target is gcc-3.3.5 which should generate better code than 2.95, as well as perhaps have some better features. It supports all 68K based CPUs up to and including the Coldfire 4e (including its MMU, FPU, and EMAC). Hopefully I'll have some sort of epiphany this weekend and get it figured out. I'm curious as to everyone's idea on the particular internal interface this should have. This will open up all sorts of things like Mmap(), real dynamic libs, more efficient program loading (you can load programs at a fixed address instead of fixing up pointers), fixing Fork() to not swap memory around, and the possibility to emulate hardware. Also, if the MMU code is done in assembly, it should have an easy C interface so that it can be tuned and modified later, and if you use assembly, should it be lowest common denominator (reduced instructions used for future coldfire compatibility - I've got a 68K->Coldfire assembly source translator too) ? -- Evan