On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 1:14 AM, Saket Sinha <saket.sinh...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Congratulations to the coreboot team for selection in GSOC 2016.
Sorry for the typo. I meant the RTEMS team. I worked for Coreboot last year so still relate to with GSOC everytime mistakenly. > > I am interested in working on x86_64 BSP as GSOC2016 project with > RTEMS and with initial guidance from Joel as to how to get started, I > am working on the same. > > Looking forward to working with the community for the same. > Regards, > Saket Sinha > > > On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 7:08 PM, Joel Sherrill <j...@rtems.org> wrote: >> >> On Feb 9, 2016 10:37 PM, "Saket Sinha" <saket.sinh...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Joel, >>> >>> Thanks for your inputs. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 1:06 AM, Joel Sherrill <j...@rtems.org> wrote: >>> > >>> > >>> > On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 12:08 PM, Saket Sinha <saket.sinh...@gmail.com> >>> > wrote: >>> >> >>> >> Hi, >>> >> >>> >> I think this is early for this but I need to enquire if x86_64_BSP ( >>> >> https://devel.rtems.org/wiki/Developer/Projects/Open/x86_64_BSP ) >>> >> could be taken as a GSOC project this year. >>> >> >>> > >>> > Yes. Assuming you mean the x86_64 bit port and accompanying BSP. >>> > >>> > If you noticed my post yesterday, we have tripped across a new embedded >>> > PC >>> > without legacy PCI BIOS support. >>> > >>> >>> Could you provide the link. I am not able to locate it on mailing list >>> or your blog. >> >> I only posted a question this week had anyone attempted to use RTEMS on a PC >> without legacy BIOS. I think the answer is no. >> >> I have done a little searching for how to use the newer UEFI services to >> replace those we use the video and PCI but so far have only found high level >> information. >> >> Sorry. This one is a known need with only early research. I was going to dig >> into the FreeBSD source next. >> >>> > Beyond the obvious port, for the purposes of your effort, there are >>> > a couple of bugs and some modernization needed by the pc386 BSP which >>> > you will likely have to address. >>> > >>> > + PCI BIOS uses legacy support. Needs to support new and old for 32-bit >>> > and new only for 64 bit. >>> > + Better APIC support. pc386 uses legacy PIC and some LPIC for SMP. >>> > Probably Ok for both 32 and 64 bit to support APIC only. >>> > + i386 does not have Thread Local Support. Both should have it. >>> > + i386 has a ticket for SMP synchronization during context switch. >>> > The code does not use atomics. Should be fixed and x86_64 follow the >>> > correct pattern. >>> > >>> >>> So now my question is that could these be solved on an emulator like >>> qemu-x86, atleast for an initial POC ? >>> I mean is a x86_64 hardware required for it( though I have a Minnowmax >>> board.) >>> >> >> I think qemu can be used for all of this. You can certainly do the APIC >> support without addressing the legacy video and PCI BIOS. >> >> Similar for the TLS and SMP issue. >> >> I believe the entire thing could be brought up and debugged on qemu with >> checkouts on real HW. Either the Minnow or even a desktop PC with the right >> BIOS settings. None of this is particularly new. APIC dates back at least a >> decade. >> >>> >>> > Basically x86_64 should assume a modern (non-legacy) PC and pc386 >>> > needs updating to support newer systems. Common hardware platform >>> > so hopefully the software is standard. >>> > >>> > I was going to write this up as a "PC386 Modernization" Project but some >>> > of it makes sense as a side-effect of your project. That project idea >>> > also >>> > included killing AT bus NICs which you wouldn't have any reason to get >>> > near. >>> > >>> > You need a subtask list (e.g. todo list) and we need to help you flesh >>> > it >>> > out. I only hit a few non-obvious highlights. >>> > >>> >>> Let me know how to dig deeper on this. Looking at the code, right but >>> than exactly what sections ? >>> >> >> libbsp/shared/i386/pci is the current legacy PCI code. >> >> The IRQ code should also be under shared. >> >> I will have to feel to see where the video probe that is failing is located. >> >> The nice thing is that each of these three can be completed in the context >> of the current BSP. >> >>> Regards, >>> Saket Sinha _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
