From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DCHR7-0007Wf-Sg for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 18 Mar 2005 08:22:45 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DCHR5-0007Vj-BH for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 18 Mar 2005 08:22:44 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DCHR5-0007V3-90 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 18 Mar 2005 08:22:43 -0500 Received: from [65.74.133.9] (helo=mail.codesourcery.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.34) id 1DCHAM-0003Vv-II for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 18 Mar 2005 08:05:26 -0500 From: Paul Brook Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Support for Wireless MMX Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 13:00:16 +0000 References: <001001c52ba8$b2b825c0$d3272dd5@bigclit> In-Reply-To: <001001c52ba8$b2b825c0$d3272dd5@bigclit> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200503181300.16407.paul@codesourcery.com> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Friday 18 March 2005 10:53, Luca Piccarreta wrote: > Hi all, > after googling a lot I concluded (hopefully) that qemu is > the only freely available solution for linux cross-toolchain > (one armv5 and one iwmmxt toolchain). The gdb simulator supports both armv5te and iwmmxt, though a small amount of hacking may be required to enable iwmmxt properly. > I might have made some mistakes, but it looks like there > are still some problems with saturated operations (qadd) > and support for Wireless MMX is lacking. > Am I correct? iWMMXt is not implemented. Saturated operations should work, though I probably haven't tested them. If you have examples that don't work, please let me/us know. > Programs compiled by the armv5 toolchain seem to work > correctly except for saturated operations, while programs > compiled by the iwmmxt toolchain work only when no > Wireless MMX is used and when normal ARMV5 shared > libraries are used. > Are both features in the future development plans? > I saw Paul Brook post a lot of patches about ARM, so > I'm quite confident... I've no immediate interest in iWMMXt. I do plan on adding support for newer arm architecture revisions, ie. armv6 and future revisions once they're public. System emulation would be nice, but that's definitely a secondary priority for me. It probably won''t happen until after armv6 is done because armv6 standardises a lot of the MMU and system coprocessor design. Paul