[Openocd-svn] r2719 - in trunk: doc src/target

[dbrownell at B. <dbr...@ma...>]

Author: dbrownell
Date: 2009-09-17 10:02:43 +0200 (Thu, 17 Sep 2009)
New Revision: 2719

Modified:
   trunk/doc/openocd.texi
   trunk/src/target/arm9tdmi.c
Log:
The "arm9tdmi.c" file is more of a generic ARM9 support file:

 - update comments to say so.
 - update docs to clarify that the "arm9tdmi" command prefix
   is a misnomer.
 - bugfix some messages that wrongly assume only ARM9TDMI
   based processors use this code.


Modified: trunk/doc/openocd.texi
===================================================================
--- trunk/doc/openocd.texi	2009-09-17 07:56:24 UTC (rev 2718)
+++ trunk/doc/openocd.texi	2009-09-17 08:02:43 UTC (rev 2719)
@@ -4932,13 +4932,18 @@
 and display the result.
 @end deffn
 
-@subsection ARM9TDMI specific commands
-@cindex ARM9TDMI
+@subsection ARM9 specific commands
+@cindex ARM9
 
-Many ARM9-family CPUs are built around ARM9TDMI integer cores,
-or processors resembling ARM9TDMI, and can use these commands.
+ARM9-family cores are built around ARM9TDMI or ARM9E (including ARM9EJS)
+integer processors.
 Such cores include the ARM920T, ARM926EJ-S, and ARM966.
 
+For historical reasons, one command shared by these cores starts
+with the @command{arm9tdmi} prefix.
+This is true even for ARM9E based processors, which implement the
+ARMv5TE architecture instead of ARMv4T.
+
 @c 9-june-2009:  tried this on arm920t, it didn't work.
 @c no-params always lists nothing caught, and that's how it acts.
 

Modified: trunk/src/target/arm9tdmi.c
===================================================================
--- trunk/src/target/arm9tdmi.c	2009-09-17 07:56:24 UTC (rev 2718)
+++ trunk/src/target/arm9tdmi.c	2009-09-17 08:02:43 UTC (rev 2719)
@@ -31,6 +31,16 @@
 #include "target_type.h"
 
 
+/*
+ * NOTE:  this holds code that's used with multiple ARM9 processors:
+ *  - ARM9TDMI (ARMv4T) ... in ARM920, ARM922, and ARM940 cores
+ *  - ARM9E-S (ARMv5TE) ... in ARM946, ARM966, and ARM968 cores
+ *  - ARM9EJS (ARMv5TEJ) ... in ARM926 core
+ *
+ * In short, the file name is a misnomer ... it is NOT specific to
+ * that first generation ARM9 processor, or cores using it.
+ */
+
 #if 0
 #define _DEBUG_INSTRUCTION_EXECUTION_
 #endif
@@ -967,8 +977,12 @@
 	command_t *arm9tdmi_cmd;
 
 	retval = arm7_9_register_commands(cmd_ctx);
-	arm9tdmi_cmd = register_command(cmd_ctx, NULL, "arm9tdmi", NULL, COMMAND_ANY, "arm9tdmi specific commands");
-	register_command(cmd_ctx, arm9tdmi_cmd, "vector_catch", handle_arm9tdmi_catch_vectors_command, COMMAND_EXEC, "catch arm920t vectors ['all'|'none'|'<vec1 vec2 ...>']");
+	arm9tdmi_cmd = register_command(cmd_ctx, NULL, "arm9tdmi",
+			NULL, COMMAND_ANY,
+			"arm9tdmi specific commands");
+	register_command(cmd_ctx, arm9tdmi_cmd, "vector_catch",
+			handle_arm9tdmi_catch_vectors_command, COMMAND_EXEC,
+			"catch arm9 vectors ['all'|'none'|'<vec1 vec2 ...>']");
 
 	return retval;
 }
@@ -985,7 +999,7 @@
 
 	if (arm9tdmi_get_arch_pointers(target, &armv4_5, &arm7_9, &arm9tdmi) != ERROR_OK)
 	{
-		command_print(cmd_ctx, "current target isn't an ARM9TDMI based target");
+		command_print(cmd_ctx, "current target isn't an ARM9 based target");
 		return ERROR_OK;
 	}