On 23/08/2018 15:09, Sebastian Huber wrote: > On 23/08/18 01:00, Chris Johns wrote: >> On 22/08/2018 22:25, Sebastian Huber wrote: >>> On 22/08/18 14:06, Joel Sherrill wrote: >>>> On Wed, Aug 22, 2018, 6:47 AM Sebastian Huber >>>> <sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de >>>> <mailto:sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de>> wrote: >>>> >>>> It really is necessary to know how the other architectures implement it. >>>> Some >>>> may turn out to be easy. Others like Epiphany and new may never matter. >>> If the niche architectures don't use libbsd (which I guess is the case), >>> then >>> there is no issue at all. >>> >> Do we document what is supported and what is not supported? > > The status of the SMP and TLS support is documented in the CPU Supplement. > > We added the TLS support for ARM, m68k, PowerPC and SPARC in January 2014 and > also recently for RISC-V. TLS is a C11 standard element. All RTEMS > architectures > which don't support it have a maintainer problem from my point of view. >
Thanks >> >> Does libbsd have suitable checks on the built RTEMS to know it cannot be >> supported? > > One way to figure out if it basically works is to run the tests. > I am referring to a configure type test. See the opts types tests rtems_waf already supports, for example SMP. >> >> FWIW I do not think the idea of "one size fits all" is workable. I think a >> number of architectures would benefit from a different smaller networking >> stack. > > libbsd is not only a network stack. It contains also USB and MMC card > support. I > work on a port of the NVMe support currently. > > FreeBSD seems to receive a huge funding from CDN providers such as Netfix and > Limelight Networks. They probably don't care about uni-processor system > support > at all. The use of lock-free data structures (Concurrency Kit) and the epoch > memory reclamation are now a mandatory infrastructure. There is no FreeBSD > configuration option to avoid this. This was a bit surprising to me. It was > also > introduced less than half a year before the planned FreeBSD 12 release. > > The recent changes in FreeBSD make the lwIP network stack even more attractive > for low-end targets. Yes. Chris _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
