forked from Imagelibrary/rtems
924e17ac81
between CPU32 and CPU32+ cores. Commentary follows:
Unfortunately c/src/exec/score/cpu/m68k/m68k.h incorrectly defines
M68K_HAS_MISALIGNED for the plain old CPU32 (it is correct for the CPU32+).
As a consequence, the recently-relocated m68k memcpy() may still attempt
misaligned memory accesses.
I suggest that until such time as egcs/gcc differentiates these cores
that we invent a new preprocessor symbol, RTEMS__mcpu32p__ for this
purpose, on the assumption that egcs may one day grow a -mcpu32+ option
which will define a __mcpu32p__ symbol (whether this option would also
define __mcpu32__ is yet to be resolved).
BSPs that have a CPU32+ (like gen68360) would for the time being define
RTEMS__mcpu32p__ using -D. The symbol is `RTEMS__mcpu32p__' because
symbols of the form __xxx__ should only be defined by the compiler
itself.
Note that the patch tests for RTEMS__mcpu32p__ *before* __mcpu32__, since
__mcpu32__ is still defined for the CPU32+. It does not change the
gen68360 BSP.
An aside:
Note that in egcs-1.0.3a, the option -m68332 is identical to -mcpu32,
except it defines __mc68332__ as well as __mcpu32__. This is only
for the sake of compatibility. The story with -m68302 is similar;
it defines __mc68302__ and __mc68000__. In my opinion these options
are depreciated and ought to be avoided in RTEMS.
#
# $Id$
#
Building RTEMS
==============
See the file README.configure.
Directory Overview
==================
This is the top level of the RTEMS directory structure. The following
is a description of the files and directories in this directory:
INSTALL
Rudimentary installation instructions. For more detailed
information please see the Release Notes. The Postscript
version of this manual can be found in the file
c_or_ada/doc/relnotes.tgz.
LICENSE
Required legalese.
README
This file.
c
This directory contains the source code for the C
implementation of RTEMS as well as the test suites, sample
applications, Board Support Packages, Device Drivers, and
support libraries.
doc
This directory contains the PDL for the RTEMS executive.
Ada versus C
============
There are two implementations of RTEMS in this source tree --
in Ada and in C. These two implementations are functionally
and structurally equivalent. The C implementation follows
the packaging conventions and hiearchical nature of the Ada
implementation. In addition, a style has been followed which
allows one to easily find the corresponding Ada and C
implementations.
File names in C and code placement was carefully designed to insure
a close mapping to the Ada implementation. The following file name
extensions are used:
.adb - Ada body
.ads - Ada specification
.adp - Ada body requiring preprocessing
.inc - include file for .adp files
.c - C body (non-inlined routines)
.inl - C body (inlined routines)
.h - C specification
In the executive source, XYZ.c and XYZ.inl correspond directly to a
single XYZ.adb or XYZ.adp file. A .h file corresponds directly to
the .ads file. There are only a handful of .inc files in the
Ada source and these are used to insure that the desired simple
inline textual expansion is performed. This avoids scoping and
calling convention side-effects in carefully constructed tests
which usually test context switch behavior.
In addition, in Ada code and data name references are always fully
qualified as PACKAGE.NAME. In C, this convention is followed
by having the package name as part of the name itself and using a
capital letter to indicate the presence of a "." level. So we have
PACKAGE.NAME in Ada and _Package_Name in C. The leading "_" in C
is used to avoid naming conflicts between RTEMS and user variables.
By using these conventions, one can easily compare the C and Ada
implementations.
The most noticeable difference between the C and Ada83 code is
the inability to easily obtain a "typed pointer" in Ada83.
Using the "&" operator in C yields a pointer with a specific type.
The 'Address attribute is the closest feature in Ada83. This
returns a System.Address and this must be coerced via Unchecked_Conversion
into an access type of the desired type. It is easy to view
System.Address as similar to a "void *" in C, but this is not the case.
A "void *" can be assigned to any other pointer type without an
explicit conversion.
The solution adopted to this problem was to provide two routines for
each access type in the Ada implementation -- one to convert from
System.Address to the access type and another to go the opposite
direction. This results in code which accomplishes the same thing
as the corresponding C but it is easier to get lost in the clutter
of the apparent subprogram invocations than the "less bulky"
C equivalent.
A related difference is the types which are only in Ada which are used
for pointers to arrays. These types do not exist and are not needed
in the C implementation.