On Monday 09 November 2009, Øyvind Harboe wrote: > > I don't follow. Disregarding all non-MMU stuff, > > and presuming the above commit gets reverted, what > > are the "no-ops" you refer to? > > Lets say we define a polymorphic cache flushing fn.
That's non-MMU stuff. You don't have an MMU-related NOP example? > Should it succeed as a no-op on targets without a > cache or should it fail? Well, ideally we would never expose such operations on cacheless targets as Tcl operations. Wanting to do so indicates a design problem... But if we had to expose methods like that to lowlevel code, it'd make most sense that it be a NOP on any target that doesn't have a (d?)cache. _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
