-----Original Message----- From: Sebastian Huber <sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> Sent: Monday, October 5, 2020 08:10 To: j...@rtems.org Cc: Kinsey Moore <kinsey.mo...@oarcorp.com>; rtems-de...@rtems.org <devel@rtems.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 04/10] bsps: Break out AArch32 GICv3 support
On 05/10/2020 14:27, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 2:04 AM Sebastian Huber > <sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de > <mailto:sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de>> wrote: > > On 04/10/2020 06:18, Kinsey Moore wrote: > > > +/** > > + * This architecture-specific function sets the exception > vector for handling > > + * IRQs. > > + */ > > +void aarch_interrupt_facility_set_exception_handler(void); > What are the rules for using an aarch prefix instead of an arm prefix? > > > I haven't talked to Kinsey about this but I would assume based on the > terminology I see in ARM documentation. > > + arm - only 32-bit. Now referred to as aarch32 or A32 > + aarch64 - only 64-bit. AKA A64 > + aarch - shared across 32 and 64 bit modes. > > Looks like Microsoft also uses ARM32 and ARM64 Linux uses "arm" and "arm64". You find some aarch32 stuff in "arch/arm64" but not in "arch/arm". I think we should do the same. Existing and shared stuff between "arm" and "aarch64" should just use "arm". [] Joel was correct as to my reasoning behind using that prefix. It sounds like arm_ is the preferred prefix for shared code in that vein, so I'll swap the relevant patches over to that instead of aarch_. Kinsey _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel