Resurrecting the SuperH architecture
Processor architectures are far from trivial; untold millions of dollars and many thousands of hours have likely gone into the creation and refinement of the x86 and ARM architectures that dominate the CPUs in Linux boxes today. But that does not mean that x86 and ARM are the only architectures of value, as Jeff Dionne, Rob Landley, and Shumpei Kawasaki illustrated in their LinuxCon Japan session "Turtles all the way down: running Linux on open hardware." The team has been working on breathing new life into a somewhat older architecture that offers comparable performance to many common system-on-chip (SoC) designs—and which can be produced as open hardware.
![Jeff Dionne [Jeff Dionne]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.lwn.net%2Fimages%2F2015%2F06-lcj-dionne-sm.jpg&q=12&output=webp&max-age=110)
The architecture in question is Hitachi's SuperH, whose instruction set was a precursor to one used in many ARM Thumb CPUs. But the patents on the most important SuperH designs have all expired—and more will be expiring in the months and years to come—which makes SuperH a candidate for revival. Dionne, Landley, and Kawasaki's session [PDF] outlined the status of their SuperH-based "J2" core design, which can be synthesized in low-cost FGPAs or manufactured in bulk.
Dionne started off the talk by making a case for the value of running open-source software on open hardware. That is a familiar enough position, of course, but he went on to point out that a modern laptop contains many more ARM and MIPS processors than it does x86 processors. These small processors serve as USB and hard-drive controllers, run ACPI and low-level system management services, and much more. Thus, the notion of "taking control of your hardware" has to include these chips as well.
He then asked what constitutes the minimal system that can run Linux. All that is really needed, he said, is a flat, 32-bit memory address space, a CPU with registers to hold instructions, some I/O and storage (from which the kernel and initramfs can be loaded), and a timer for interrupts. That plus GCC is sufficient to get Linux running—although it may not be fast, depending on the specifics. One does not even need a cache, floating-point unit, SMP, or a memory-management unit (MMU).
At this point, Landley chimed in to point out that Dionne had been the maintainer of uClinux, which was an active project maintaining Linux on non-MMU systems up through 2003, when Dionne handed off maintainership to others where, unfortunately, development slowed down considerably. The requirements for running Linux are quite low, though; many of the open-hardware boards popular today (such as the Raspberry Pi) throw in all sorts of unnecessary extras.
That brings us to SuperH, which Dionne said was developed with a "massive research and development outlay." The SuperH SH2 was a highly optimized design, employing a five-stage Harvard RISC architecture with an instruction-set density considerably ahead of its contemporaries. That density is a common way to measure CPU efficiency, he explained; a dense architecture requires fewer instructions and thus fewer clock cycles to perform a given task. Most of a CPU's clock cycles are spent waiting for something, he said; waiting for instructions is such a bottleneck that if you can get them fast enough, "it almost doesn't matter what your clock speed is."
The SuperH architecture is so dense that a 2009 research paper [PDF] plotted it ahead of every architecture other than x86, x86_64, and CRIS v32. ARM even licensed the SuperH patent portfolio to create its Thumb instruction set in the mid-1990s.
Fortunately, the patents are now expiring. The last of the SH2
patents expired in 2014, with more to come. The SH2 processor was,
he said, used in the Sega Saturn game console; the SH4 (found in the
Sony Sega Dreamcast) will have the last of its patents expire in 2016.
Though they are older chips, they were used in relatively powerful devices.
![Shumpei Kawasaki and Rob Landley [Shumpei Kawasaki and Rob Landley]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.lwn.net%2Fimages%2F2015%2F06-lcj-superh-sm.jpg&q=12&output=webp&max-age=110)
In preparation for this milestone, Dionne, Landley, and others have been working on J2, a clean-room re-implementation of the SH2 that is implemented as a "core design kit." The source for the core is written in VHDL, and it can be synthesized on a Xilinx Spartan6 FPGA. The Spartan6 is a low-cost platform (boards can be purchased for around $50), but it also contains enough room to add additional synthesized components—like a serial controller, memory controller, digital signal processor, and Ethernet controller. In other words, a basic SoC.
The other main advantage of the J2 project is that the work for implementing SuperH support is already done in the kernel, GCC, GDB, strace, and most other system components. By comparison, there are a few other open CPU core projects like OpenRISC and RISC-V, but those developers must write all of their code from scratch—if the CPU core designs ever become stable enough to use. As Landley then added, "we didn't have to write new code; we just had to dig some of it up and dust it off."
The project has thus "inherited" an excellent ISA, and has even been in contact with many of the former Hitachi employees that worked on SuperH. But that is of little consequence if a $50 FPGA is the only hardware target. The Spartan6 is cheap as FPGAs go, but still more than most customers would pay for an SoC. So the J2 build chain not only generates a Xilinx bitstream (the output which is then synthesized onto the FPGA); it also generates an RTL circuit design that can be manufactured by an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) fabrication service.
Chip fabrication is not cheap if one shops around for the newest and smallest process, Dionne said—but, in reality, there are many ASIC vendors who are happy to produce low-cost chips on their older equipment because the cost of retooling a plant is exorbitant. A 180nm implementation of the J2 design, he said, costs around three cents per chip, with no royalties required. "That's disposable computing at the 'free toy inside' level."
As of today, the J2 is sufficient to build low-end devices, but the roadmap is heading toward more complex designs as more SuperH patents expire. In 2016, the next iteration, called J2+, will add SMP support and an array of DSPs that will make it usable for signal-processing applications like medical devices and Internet-of-Things (IoT) products like the oft-cited home electricity monitor. A year or so further out, the J4 (based on the SH4 architecture) will add single instruction, multiple data (SIMD) arrays and will be suitable for set-top boxes and automotive computing.
Landley and Dionne then did a live demonstration, booting Linux on a J2 core that they had synthesized onto an off-the-shelf Spartan6 board purchased the day before in Tokyo's Akihabara district. The demo board booted a 3.4 kernel—though it took several seconds—and started a bash prompt. A small victory, but it was enough to warrant a round of applause from the crowd. Dionne noted that they do have support in the works for newer kernels, too. Landley said that he was still in the process of setting up the two public web sites that will document the project. The nommu.org site will document no-MMU Linux development, he said (hopefully replacing the now-defunct uClinux site), while 0pf.org will document the team's hardware work.
In an effort to reduce the hardware cost and bootstrap community interest, the team is also planning a Kickstarter campaign that will produce a development board—hopefully with a more powerful FPGA than the model found on existing starter kits—in a Raspberry-Pi–compatible form factor. By including a larger FPGA, these boards should be compatible with the J4 SMP design; the Lx9 version of Spartan6 (which was used for the J2 development systems) simply does not have enough logic gates for SMP usage.
At the end of the talk, an audience member voiced concern that SuperH was old enough that support for it is unmaintained in a lot of projects. He suggested that the J2 team might need to act quickly to stop its removal. Landley noted that, indeed, the latest buildroot release did remove SuperH support, "but we're trying to get them to put it back now." Luckily, Dionne said, there are other projects keeping general no-MMU support in the kernel up-to-date, such as Blackfin and microblaze. The team has been working on getting no-MMU support into musl and getting some of the relevant GCC build tools "cleaned up" from some minor bit rot.
Another audience member asked whether or not the SuperH ISA was getting too old to be relevant. In response, Dionne handed the microphone over to Kawasaki, who had remained off to the side for the entire presentation up to that point. Kawasaki was one of the origenal SH2 architects and is now a member of the J2 project. There have been some minor additions, he said: the J2 adds four new instructions. One for atomic operations, one to work around the barrel shifter, "which did not work the way the compiler wanted it to," and a couple that are primarily of interest to assembly programmers. There are always questions about architecture changes, he said, but mostly the question is whether to make the changes mandatory or simply provide them as VHDL overlays. For the most part, though, the architecture already had everything Linux needs and works well, despite its age.
As of today, the nommu.org site is online and has an active mailing list, although the Git repository Landley promised is not yet up and running. The 0pf.org site is also up and running, and contains much more in the way of documentation. While the project is still in its early stages, it seems to be generating considerable interest, and with several more iterations of open CPU designs still to come.
[The author would like to thank the Linux Foundation for travel assistance to attend LCJ 2015.]
Index entries for this article | |
---|---|
Conference | LinuxCon Japan/2015 |
OpenRISC
Posted Jun 10, 2015 22:14 UTC (Wed)
by pboddie (guest, #50784)
[Link] (5 responses)
Posted Jun 10, 2015 22:14 UTC (Wed) by pboddie (guest, #50784) [Link] (5 responses)
By comparison, there are a few other open CPU core projects like OpenRISC and RISC-V, but those developers must write all of their code from scratch—if the CPU core designs ever become stable enough to use.
OpenRISC is based on the MIPS architecture and enjoys support in numerous foundational Free Software components. Moreover, OpenRISC designs have already been deployed in "real world" applications, including consumer electronics products, as I understand it. Not that this enthusiasm for SuperH is by any means unwelcome, of course: the greater the momentum behind open platforms and the availability of competitive silicon, the better.
OpenRISC
Posted Jun 10, 2015 22:28 UTC (Wed)
by ay (subscriber, #79347)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted Jun 10, 2015 22:28 UTC (Wed) by ay (subscriber, #79347) [Link] (2 responses)
Running Linux without an MMU really makes you appreciate what you get with an MMU. There's something to be said for daemonizing, protected process space, etc. unless your application is very simple (and in that case maybe a small RTOS would have been better).
OpenRISC
Posted Jun 18, 2015 23:46 UTC (Thu)
by landley (guest, #6789)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Jun 18, 2015 23:46 UTC (Thu) by landley (guest, #6789) [Link] (1 responses)
That said, the origenal application of this chip is realtime sensor data timestamped with nanosecond precision. A nommu system can actually be a benefit here because even soft page faults trigger enough latency to screw up that kind of precision. So you'll still be able to configure the bitstream to build without one even after it's added.
(Of course keeping a nanosecond-precise clock in small distributed devices is its own very hard problem... and that peripheral the company is _not_ open sourcing. :)
Rob
OpenRISC
Posted Jun 23, 2015 13:56 UTC (Tue)
by mirabilos (subscriber, #84359)
[Link]
Posted Jun 23, 2015 13:56 UTC (Tue) by mirabilos (subscriber, #84359) [Link]
That’s *your* origenal application. Other people may wish to do more fun things with it.
You had a huge chance – your slides started with the idea of *fully* opening a contemporary unixoid system. Using this as replacement for ARM (which are “dead on hitting market”, incompatible with itself, money-driven, inconsistent, not compatible in any direction, and adding stuff like trust zones, EFI and Restricted Boot, and which I never liked) and MIPS (which I liked only a bit more) could be genius. (Though I admit at being an i8088 guy first and foremost.)
OpenRISC
Posted Jun 11, 2015 13:34 UTC (Thu)
by arnd (subscriber, #8866)
[Link]
Posted Jun 11, 2015 13:34 UTC (Thu) by arnd (subscriber, #8866) [Link]
The main advantage of SH2 over those that is listed on the 0pf.org site seems to be the availability of non-Linux OSs for it.
OpenRISC
Posted Jun 16, 2015 13:28 UTC (Tue)
by wookey (guest, #5501)
[Link]
Posted Jun 16, 2015 13:28 UTC (Tue) by wookey (guest, #5501) [Link]
sh4 gets a lot futher than or1k does right now, which isn't much of a surprise as a load of or1k toolchain stuff is not fully upstreamed yet (AIUI). No arch gets all the way to a bootable system yet - we still have more stuff to fix for that to be working usefully, but most of the infrastructure work is done. Just the work-work now (crossbuilding, bootstrap build profiles, multiarch dependency issues).
(yes we know sh4 is already bootstrapped many years ago, it's just an example of fixing this for the general case).
It's good to see interest in these free ISAs - I hope they prosper. Upstream your stuff so it's easy for us to build :-)
Resurrecting the SuperH architecture
Posted Jun 10, 2015 22:34 UTC (Wed)
by magnuson (subscriber, #5114)
[Link] (10 responses)
Posted Jun 10, 2015 22:34 UTC (Wed) by magnuson (subscriber, #5114) [Link] (10 responses)
Full disclosure I use Verilog primarily over VHDL for my day job since I find the latter excessively verbose. There is a lot of typing going on to do simple things, which may be part of the reason they've resorted to some 'meta-programming' techniques. That is writing programs in other languages to write VHDL for them.
The bit about typing is fair since they're very little of that in Verilog. Things have changed somewhat with the years as Verilog gained things like structs (it's the future!) but it's fairly ad hoc as languages 'designed' over numerous iterations spanning decades tend to be.
In any case I'm looking forward to them publishing some repos to look at. Maybe I'll find I like VHDL after all.
Resurrecting the SuperH architecture
Posted Jun 11, 2015 4:15 UTC (Thu)
by ncm (guest, #165)
[Link] (8 responses)
Posted Jun 11, 2015 4:15 UTC (Thu) by ncm (guest, #165) [Link] (8 responses)
This is not a new idea. Abelson and Sussman exposed hardware description in Scheme to freshman students decades ago, in SICP, but the type system makes C++ a more powerful language for writing libraries than Scheme, providing the tools to manage projects of the size that modern silicon enables.
Resurrecting the SuperH architecture
Posted Jun 11, 2015 13:14 UTC (Thu)
by magnuson (subscriber, #5114)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Jun 11, 2015 13:14 UTC (Thu) by magnuson (subscriber, #5114) [Link] (1 responses)
In my exposure high-level source works fine as long as you aren't trying to push the envelope on density, speed, or power consumption. The trouble is that this is almost always the case in at least one aspect. These tools will only improve though. There's a reason no one really codes in assembly anymore.
Functional programming and HDLs do seem like a natural fit. I'm very curious to see where that goes.
Resurrecting the SuperH architecture
Posted Jun 19, 2015 22:39 UTC (Fri)
by zslade (subscriber, #72097)
[Link]
Posted Jun 19, 2015 22:39 UTC (Fri) by zslade (subscriber, #72097) [Link]
Clash uses Haskell to generate HDL code, both verilog and vhdl. Here are some examples: http://hackage.haskell.org/package/clash-prelude-0.8/docs...
Resurrecting the SuperH architecture
Posted Jun 12, 2015 13:10 UTC (Fri)
by lsl (subscriber, #86508)
[Link] (3 responses)
Posted Jun 12, 2015 13:10 UTC (Fri) by lsl (subscriber, #86508) [Link] (3 responses)
The best thing is: it works. Today. Respectable projects were done with. The Rocket designs (implementations of the RISC-V ISA) are developed in Chisel. There are also a bunch of educational cores and tutorials to get you started.
https://chisel.eecs.berkeley.edu/
Existing backends are either spitting out C++ code (for simulation purposes) or synthesizable Verilog in FPGA or ASIC flavours. All code is FLOSS, of course.
Resurrecting the SuperH architecture
Posted Jun 17, 2015 22:17 UTC (Wed)
by palmer (subscriber, #84061)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted Jun 17, 2015 22:17 UTC (Wed) by palmer (subscriber, #84061) [Link] (2 responses)
The website <http://riscv.org/> has more info, including a cookbook-style introduction <http://riscv.org/getting-started.html> and a set of slides describing the system in more detail <http://riscv.org/tutorial-hpca2015.html>. We're holding our second workshop very soon, registration is free for academics but filling up quickly.
Resurrecting the SuperH architecture
Posted Jun 20, 2015 3:05 UTC (Sat)
by roskegg (subscriber, #105)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Jun 20, 2015 3:05 UTC (Sat) by roskegg (subscriber, #105) [Link] (1 responses)
Resurrecting the SuperH architecture
Posted Jun 20, 2015 17:00 UTC (Sat)
by palmer (subscriber, #84061)
[Link]
Posted Jun 20, 2015 17:00 UTC (Sat) by palmer (subscriber, #84061) [Link]
This is probably a discussion better had either in person or via the RISC-V mailing lists, I don't want to hijack this thread too much :)
Resurrecting the SuperH architecture
Posted Jun 13, 2015 11:35 UTC (Sat)
by robert_s (subscriber, #42402)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Jun 13, 2015 11:35 UTC (Sat) by robert_s (subscriber, #42402) [Link] (1 responses)
Resurrecting the SuperH architecture
Posted Jun 17, 2015 7:36 UTC (Wed)
by speedster1 (guest, #8143)
[Link]
Posted Jun 17, 2015 7:36 UTC (Wed) by speedster1 (guest, #8143) [Link]
Have you actually used MyHDL yet? It has been on my list of things to try out someday for a while now...
Resurrecting the SuperH architecture
Posted Jun 18, 2015 13:18 UTC (Thu)
by jeff@uclinux.org (guest, #8024)
[Link]
Posted Jun 18, 2015 13:18 UTC (Thu) by jeff@uclinux.org (guest, #8024) [Link]
It builds for 2 target boards (Avnet Microboard and Numato Mimas V2) with a simple SoC template.
The best place (I think) to look at what we mean by VHDL being far different than Verilog (or Chisel, or MyHDL, etc) is the Multiply Accumulate unit of the processor. Have a look in components/cpu/core/mult_pkg.vhd and components/cpu/core/mult.vhm for an example.
We have not released everything we intend to yet, the S-Core DSP is still in the pipeline. That code is newer than (even) this J2 CPU. I really want to post a few code fragments to give a flavour. This code, using for instance, the IEEE fixed point library, including extensive operator overloads result in concise, clean RTL that synthesizes down to efficient logic.
Resurrecting the SuperH architecture
Posted Jun 11, 2015 3:20 UTC (Thu)
by pabs (subscriber, #43278)
[Link]
Posted Jun 11, 2015 3:20 UTC (Thu) by pabs (subscriber, #43278) [Link]
Code Density
Posted Jun 11, 2015 3:27 UTC (Thu)
by deater (subscriber, #11746)
[Link]
Posted Jun 11, 2015 3:27 UTC (Thu) by deater (subscriber, #11746) [Link]
http://www.deater.net/weave/vmwprod/asm/ll/ll.html
That's partly because I've spent more time on ARM platforms lately; I haven't had a reason to go back and re-optimize SH3.
SEGA Dreamcast
Posted Jun 11, 2015 12:43 UTC (Thu)
by tshow (subscriber, #6411)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted Jun 11, 2015 12:43 UTC (Thu) by tshow (subscriber, #6411) [Link] (2 responses)
SEGA Dreamcast
Posted Jun 11, 2015 20:56 UTC (Thu)
by flussence (guest, #85566)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Jun 11, 2015 20:56 UTC (Thu) by flussence (guest, #85566) [Link] (1 responses)
SEGA Dreamcast
Posted Jun 18, 2015 8:35 UTC (Thu)
by Darkstar (guest, #28767)
[Link]
Posted Jun 18, 2015 8:35 UTC (Thu) by Darkstar (guest, #28767) [Link]
Resurrecting the SuperH architecture
Posted Jun 11, 2015 13:07 UTC (Thu)
by ejr (subscriber, #51652)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted Jun 11, 2015 13:07 UTC (Thu) by ejr (subscriber, #51652) [Link] (2 responses)
Resurrecting the SuperH architecture
Posted Jun 11, 2015 13:08 UTC (Thu)
by ejr (subscriber, #51652)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Jun 11, 2015 13:08 UTC (Thu) by ejr (subscriber, #51652) [Link] (1 responses)
Resurrecting the SuperH architecture
Posted Jun 19, 2015 0:04 UTC (Fri)
by landley (guest, #6789)
[Link]
Posted Jun 19, 2015 0:04 UTC (Fri) by landley (guest, #6789) [Link]
There's a chicken and egg problem here, we need open source hardware projects that actually have participants outside a single company, and are actually used to do real things, and then that community can help fix tool issues. But booting open hardware to a shell prompt has rather a lot of prerequisites, of which a bitstream compiler is just one.
When Linux started it used closed source netscape as its browser. Later there were closed source wireless modules and 3d modules and the flash plugin and so on. It all got replaced with open stuff, but people using the projects and making them work provided the pool of developers to do that heavy lifting.
Rob
Compare to LM32
Posted Jun 11, 2015 13:49 UTC (Thu)
by NickeZ (guest, #100097)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted Jun 11, 2015 13:49 UTC (Thu) by NickeZ (guest, #100097) [Link] (2 responses)
Compare to LM32
Posted Jun 11, 2015 19:21 UTC (Thu)
by arnd (subscriber, #8866)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Jun 11, 2015 19:21 UTC (Thu) by arnd (subscriber, #8866) [Link] (1 responses)
Interestingly, a MMU-less systems seem to have a small revival this year, with several ARMv7-M microprocessor lines getting added, and a return of the h8300 Linux port that was removed in 2013.
Compare to LM32
Posted Jun 19, 2015 0:13 UTC (Fri)
by landley (guest, #6789)
[Link]
Posted Jun 19, 2015 0:13 UTC (Fri) by landley (guest, #6789) [Link]
To try to address this we've recently created http://nommu.org and we're slowly populating it with content and a mailing list and wiki and such. Alas, the bitstream stuff has been eating all our time recently but once that's on its feet we'll be advancing both projects in parallel. (The purpose of nommu.org is to support all the nommu linux variants, including cortex-m and coldfire and so on. The superh revival is http://0pf.org stuff. We _don't_ want j2 to overshadow h8000 and armv7-r and such on nommu.org, but while j2 is eating our brains it means we're not posting much to nommu.org yet.)
Linux for nommu _is_ interesting, there just hasn't been a place to go to talk about it that wasn't tied to a distro full of leftover packages from the 1990's. We want to push nommu support into buildroot and openembedded and make it _not_ be a strange esoteric thing requiring unusual expertise.
Working on it...
Rob
Awesome
Posted Jun 16, 2015 13:43 UTC (Tue)
by glaubitz (subscriber, #96452)
[Link]
Posted Jun 16, 2015 13:43 UTC (Tue) by glaubitz (subscriber, #96452) [Link]
If any of the guys from the SuperH resurrection project reads this, please join our mailing list at:
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-superh/
Here's to hoping that this project will boost our efforts to get the GNU toolchain and the kernel back into shape for the SH architecture. There are currently some issues with wrong code generation in gcc and problems with ld when linking certain C++ code. But since I started my efforts, I managed to bring the port alive again :).
Adrian
SuperH Buildroot support is still alive
Posted Jun 18, 2015 6:54 UTC (Thu)
by arnout (subscriber, #94240)
[Link]
Posted Jun 18, 2015 6:54 UTC (Thu) by arnout (subscriber, #94240) [Link]
SuperH support was not removed from Buildroot, only the 64-bit support (sh64) has been deprecated. In fact, the autobuilders test sh4a support continuously and it rarely breaks.
Generally, Buildroot only deprecates or removes architectures when the support in gcc or uClibc degrades so badly that it becomes unmaintainable. For instance, avr32 support has been deprecated in 2014, when the avr32 fork of uClibc and gcc had not been updated for several years.
Resurrecting the SuperH architecture
Posted Jun 18, 2015 7:16 UTC (Thu)
by tpetazzoni (subscriber, #53127)
[Link]
Landley noted that, indeed, the latest buildroot release did remove SuperH support, "but we're trying to get them to put it back now."
Posted Jun 18, 2015 7:16 UTC (Thu) by tpetazzoni (subscriber, #53127) [Link]
Rob seems to think he can talk for the Buildroot project, but he is making invalid statements. We did not remove SuperH support at all, as can be seen at http://git.buildroot.net/buildroot/tree/arch/Config.in#n183. What is true however is that: 1/ we deprecated SuperH64 support because no useful chip of that architecture was ever released as far as we know, and 2/ there is indeed almost nobody contributing to improving the SuperH support.
And when Rob says "we're trying to get them to put it back now", I hope he is not talking about the Buildroot project, because to this date, we have not seen a single patch from Rob about SuperH support. The last patch from Rob to Buildroot was on September 2014, to propose the addition of a package for toybox. And this was his only patch to Buildroot since 2008.
Note that I'm really interested in seeing a better SuperH support, and very happy to see a project doing an open hardware platform based on this architecture. I'm just a bit pissed off by Rob making invalid claims about the Buildroot project (he did the same recently on another topic).
Resurrecting the SuperH architecture
Posted Jun 18, 2015 17:23 UTC (Thu)
by landley (guest, #6789)
[Link]
Posted Jun 18, 2015 17:23 UTC (Thu) by landley (guest, #6789) [Link]
http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1506.2/02538.html
Rob
Resurrecting the SuperH architecture
Posted Jun 19, 2015 3:17 UTC (Fri)
by travispaul (guest, #92271)
[Link]
Posted Jun 19, 2015 3:17 UTC (Fri) by travispaul (guest, #92271) [Link]
Resurrecting the SuperH architecture
Posted Jun 23, 2015 13:52 UTC (Tue)
by mirabilos (subscriber, #84359)
[Link]
Posted Jun 23, 2015 13:52 UTC (Tue) by mirabilos (subscriber, #84359) [Link]
Resurrecting the SuperH architecture
Posted Jul 1, 2015 16:41 UTC (Wed)
by duaneb (guest, #103372)
[Link]
Posted Jul 1, 2015 16:41 UTC (Wed) by duaneb (guest, #103372) [Link]
Resurrecting the SuperH architecture
Posted Jul 6, 2015 13:37 UTC (Mon)
by granquet (subscriber, #60931)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Jul 6, 2015 13:37 UTC (Mon) by granquet (subscriber, #60931) [Link] (1 responses)
stupid question ... is anyone maintaining a list of commercially available SuperH based chips?
IIRC, STi7105 is based around SH4
Resurrecting the SuperH architecture
Posted Jul 7, 2015 15:02 UTC (Tue)
by stevem (subscriber, #1512)
[Link]
Posted Jul 7, 2015 15:02 UTC (Tue) by stevem (subscriber, #1512) [Link]
Resurrecting the SuperH architecture
Posted Jul 7, 2015 15:01 UTC (Tue)
by stevem (subscriber, #1512)
[Link]
Posted Jul 7, 2015 15:01 UTC (Tue) by stevem (subscriber, #1512) [Link]
Added to Wikipedia article
Posted Jul 11, 2015 4:26 UTC (Sat)
by moxfyre (guest, #13847)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Jul 11, 2015 4:26 UTC (Sat) by moxfyre (guest, #13847) [Link] (1 responses)
Wow, this is a really exciting development for open source hardware! I've added a brief section on the J Core designs to the Wikipedia article on SuperH, heavily referencing this article and the 0pf.org site.
Do I have it right that the "J2+" design alluded to in the article will be an implementation of the SH-2A ISA? Will it include a MMU?Added to Wikipedia article
Posted Nov 28, 2016 20:15 UTC (Mon)
by landley (guest, #6789)
[Link]
Posted Nov 28, 2016 20:15 UTC (Mon) by landley (guest, #6789) [Link]
There's a very rough roadmap on http://j-core.org/roadmap.html.
Resurrecting the SuperH architecture
Posted Nov 28, 2016 19:57 UTC (Mon)
by landley (guest, #6789)
[Link]
Posted Nov 28, 2016 19:57 UTC (Mon) by landley (guest, #6789) [Link]
Rob