Re: Common kernel image for e300 and e500v2

[Johns Daniel <johns.daniel@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 981 bytes --]

Thank you for that piece of info, Scott!

May I expand the question one bit, and ask whether the user-mode binaries
compiled for the e300 will generally work for the e500 -- or, vice versa? Is
one choice safer than the other?

I know for sure that we take a big hit on floating-point ops, but are there
other things I am not considering?

-- Johns

On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 10:21 AM, Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>wrote:

> Johns Daniel wrote:
>
>> Is it possible -- and prudent -- to use a single kernel binary image
>> for two similar boards, one based on an e300 core and the other on an
>> e500v2 core?
>>
>
> No, it is not possible.  They use different MMUs, and the kernel does not
> support choosing between them at runtime.
>
>  I was surprised to see that the e500v2-targeted toolchain did build
>> the kernel for the e300 board just fine. Don't know whether this will
>> always be true?
>>
>
> "always" is a strong word, but it should generally work.
>
> -Scott
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1679 bytes --]