Why not Linux on Atmel AVR32UC3? - Embedded

This is a discussion on Why not Linux on Atmel AVR32UC3? - Embedded ; I'm told that the Atmel AVR32UC3A/B (and their associated eval boards, the EVK1100/1) cannot run Linux because the processor doesn't have an MMU... hence something like the AVR32-AP7, at a minimum, is needed. On the other hand, uCLinux is specifically ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Why not Linux on Atmel AVR32UC3?

  1. Why not Linux on Atmel AVR32UC3?


    I'm told that the Atmel AVR32UC3A/B (and their associated eval boards,
    the EVK1100/1) cannot run Linux because the processor doesn't have an
    MMU... hence something like the AVR32-AP7, at a minimum, is needed.

    On the other hand, uCLinux is specifically designed to run on
    processors without MMUs. So, any reason why uCLinux cannot run on the
    AVR32UCA/B?

    Has anyone done such a port? I have searched the net and cannot find
    one so far.


  2. Re: Why not Linux on Atmel AVR32UC3?

    On Fri, 05 Sep 2008 20:01:40 -0400, C J Clegg wrote:

    >I'm told that the Atmel AVR32UC3A/B (and their associated eval boards,
    >the EVK1100/1) cannot run Linux because the processor doesn't have an
    >MMU... hence something like the AVR32-AP7, at a minimum, is needed.


    >On the other hand, uCLinux is specifically designed to run on
    >processors without MMUs. So, any reason why uCLinux cannot run on the
    >AVR32UCA/B?


    Google for embedded linux. Downloaded it and read the ****ing docs.

  3. Re: Why not Linux on Atmel AVR32UC3?

    On Fri, 05 Sep 2008 19:58:54 -0500, AZ Nomad
    wrote:

    >> Google for embedded linux. Downloaded it and read the ****ing docs.


    Good evening, AZ.

    I've been doing that all day. But, thanks for your suggestion.


  4. Re: Why not Linux on Atmel AVR32UC3?

    C. J. Clegg wrote:
    > I'm told that the Atmel AVR32UC3A/B (and their associated eval boards,
    > the EVK1100/1) cannot run Linux because the processor doesn't have an
    > MMU... hence something like the AVR32-AP7, at a minimum, is needed.
    >
    > On the other hand, uCLinux is specifically designed to run on
    > processors without MMUs. So, any reason why uCLinux cannot run on the
    > AVR32UCA/B?
    >
    > Has anyone done such a port? I have searched the net and cannot find
    > one so far.
    >


    The AVR32UCA/B are targeted as microcontrollers, not microprocessors.
    It's not the lack of the MMU that's the main problem (as you say,
    uCLinux can be used to get around that). It's the lack of memory -
    these devices have internal flash and ram, and no external databus. You
    need at least 2 MB flash and 4 MB ram to make a sensible Linux system,
    and these devices have not nearly enough.

  5. Re: Why not Linux on Atmel AVR32UC3?

    C. J. Clegg wrote:
    > cannot run Linux because the processor doesn't have an
    > MMU...


    Linux for CPUs without an MMU is called µCLinux (or uCLinux). It is very
    widely used on small devices.

    -Michael

  6. Re: Why not Linux on Atmel AVR32UC3?

    "Michael Schnell" skrev i meddelandet
    news:48C4E0D3.7040306@gmx.com...
    > C. J. Clegg wrote:
    >> cannot run Linux because the processor doesn't have an
    >> MMU...

    >
    > Linux for CPUs without an MMU is called µCLinux (or uCLinux). It is very
    > widely used on small devices.
    >
    > -Michael


    Do you have any data supporting that statement?

    Of all embedded ARM Linux projects I have seen (~200),
    I can think of *one* using a MMU less ARM.
    That was around year 2000.
    Rest are using ARM9/11 with MMU.

    --
    Best Regards,
    Ulf Samuelsson
    This is intended to be my personal opinion which may,
    or may not be shared by my employer Atmel Nordic AB



  7. Re: Why not Linux on Atmel AVR32UC3?

    > Of all embedded ARM Linux projects I have seen (~200),
    > I can think of *one* using a MMU less ARM.
    > That was around year 2000.
    > Rest are using ARM9/11 with MMU.
    >


    Regarding ARM you might be right, as the more powerful (thus useful for
    Linux projects) do have an MMU. Even though the ARM MMU design is bad
    (located "behind" the cache instead of "before" as with the x86 and
    other CPUs and thus requesting for cache flush with any task switch) and
    thus not using the MMU makes some projects a lot faster, most developers
    don't like to do without the additional comfort an MMU grants.

    But there are lots of other processor brands but ARM (regarding the
    subject we are discussing AVR right now). The Linux tool chain I use
    features 23 main CPU architectures (one is ARM which internally is split
    in an MMU enabled and a non-MMU branch).

    Of course not implementing an MMU makes the hardware faster, too.

    I'm working on a project with a NIOS processor. This CPU does not exist
    in hardware, but is configured in an FPGA. You can choose if you want it
    with or without MMU. (With MMU: more programming comfort and security,
    but more FPGA resources, slower hardware and slower OS.) So I plan to
    use it without MMU in production but fall back to configure an MMU in a
    testing system for debugging when appropriate.

    -Michael

+ Reply to Thread