[linuxsh-dev] SH5 Linux and 2.5

[Con B. <Con...@st...>]

Hi,
  I work for the new SH company SuperH, Inc and this message on the
LinuxSH mailing list was brought to my attention. 

SuperH intends to work in the Open Source model and we intend to support
Linux & Gcc not just for SH5 but also SH4. We are in the process of setting up
a blanket copyright assignment for the FSF to allow us to donate our work to the
open source community.

There are delays in making the SH5 architecture public due partially to the setting up
of SuperH but once this is resolved then we'll be able to announce our support
for Gnu Linux both in terms of resources and information. In particular the situation
with NDA's is temporary and will be removed.

Con Bradley

con...@su...

SuperH, Inc
2430 Aztec West
Almondsbury
Bristol
BS32 4AQ
UK.
www.superh.com


> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2001 09:13:22 +0900 (JST)
> From: NIIBE Yutaka <gn...@m1...>
> To: lin...@li...
> Subject: [linuxsh-dev] Preparing for 2.5
> 
> What I'm doing these weeks:
> I believe I have now the stable GCC which can "make bootstrap", lastly.
> "make bootstrap" means "make bootstrap" literally.  There has been a bug
> to stop that process.  With -O0, large switch statement cannot be compiled
> correctly (expor.c and fold-const.c).
> I think I found the bug (See gcc-patches for the fix)...
> 
> M. R. Brown wrote:
>  > Today Linus hinted that 2.5.x is right around the corner.  This is probably
>  > a good idea for LinuxSH to decide what's going to happen to the port during
>  > the 2.5 cycle.  Here are some of my ideas:
>  > 
>  > - SH backend drop-in tree and restructuring.  Yes, I know it's been months
>  >   since anyone has heard anything from me on this, but this week I'll be
>  >   cleaning up the drop-in tree started by Greg and preparing to import it
>  >   into CVS under a 'linux' module.  The initial drop-in tree will be
>  >   against the 2.4 series.  Once this is done we should *completely* abandon
>  >   the massive 'kernel' module, since all of the relevant drop-in code will
>  >   be the linux module anyway.  And no, I would've suggested archiving point
>  >   releases of the kernel module, but it seems that mainline merges (from
>  >   mainline to LinuxSH haven't been tagged for a looong time).  Just file a
>  >   SR at Sourceforge to remove the darn thing :P.
> 
> Good.
> 
>  > - What's up for 2.5?  When I met with NIIBE-san at LWE, he mentioned that
>  >   one of the main things he saw for 2.5 was the beginnings of SH5 support.
>  >   The SH5 has a dual-addressing mode, so we'll have to start working on
>  >   64-bit support for the backend, among other things.  Did anyone else have
>  >   agendas for 2.5?  With the new layout/restructuring, hopefully it'll be
>  >   a lot easier to add support for new boards and processors.
> 
> I was a bit optimistic.  At that time, I expected the development
> environment would be available soon to the public.  The real world is
> not like I expected.
> 
> Situation is different.  As of SH-3/SH-4, it's under control of Hitachi.
> For SH-5, it's SuperH, Inc., who is in charge of. 
> 
> For SH-5, it seems for me that it's quite difficult to begin the
> development.  I think that I can't do at my position.  For now,
> there's no publically available development environment, I mean, GCC
> and such.  Even the technical manual of SH-5 CPU is not available for
> public.
> 
> Perhaps, it could be available under NDA with SuperH, Inc.  However,
> it is very very very much difficult at my position (public servant) to
> sign NDA to specific company.
> 
> I won't go the direction to support SH-5, in near future, perhaps never.
> 
> I wish someone with experience could join the SH-5 kernel development.