On Thursday 22 October 2009, Øyvind Harboe wrote: > I'm thinking about adding these two fn's to target->type. It would > provide a polymorphic interface on top of which we can implement > general mrc/mcr commands. > > Do we need anything but cp15? If not, then cpnum could be > omitted.
I'd include cpnum ... and wrap the params in a struct :) > /* Read coprocessor - arm specific. Default implementation returns > error. */ > int (*mrc)(struct target_s *target, int cpnum, uint32_t op1, uint32_t > op2, uint32_t CRn, uint32_t CRm, uint32_t *value); > > /* Write coprocessor. Default implementation returns error. */ > int (*mrc)(struct target_s *target, int cpnum, uint32_t op1, uint32_t > op2, uint32_t CRn, uint32_t CRm, uint32_t value); These would be methods in the armv4_5 struct yes? The thing that should be core-ARM-for-everything-except-Cortex-M? > Regarding command syntax, since we're omitting the register > to/from argument we're not 100% compatible with the machine code > syntax anyway. It should be a conceptual "Tcl register" ... :) > For the mrc(read) operation, I was thinking about having the register > read returned as a Tcl result, so one could do: > > set result [mrc x y ...] > > > I want the commands to be tcl friendly, on top of which we can implement > tcl wrappers for humans. Why need a wrapper? If you return the value, it'll be printed... _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
