Ping. Sorry for pinging so quickly but please understand that this is hampering my progress.
Thanks, Niteesh. On Sun, Aug 9, 2020 at 12:52 AM Niteesh G. S. <niteesh...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > I have created a basic outline of how the RTEMS openfirm API would > look like. The implementation is inspired by the openfirm.h implementation > in FreeBSD. > > Please a have look at the last 2 commits > > https://github.com/gs-niteesh/rtems/commits/ofw-rtems6-fdt-implementation-v1 > > Since we are concerned only about the FDT implementation (also libBSD) > I have removed all functions that are not supported by the FDT > implementation > for eg: OF_write, OF_call etc. > > I have a few questions regarding the API. > > 1) Should we 100% conform with the OFW API? As mentioned above the > current idea will not implement functions like OF_call, OF_write etc. > > 2) For libBSD drivers to work we need to support the following functions > > device_t OF_device_from_xref(phandle_t xref); > phandle_t OF_xref_from_device(device_t dev); > int OF_device_register_xref(phandle_t xref, device_t dev); > > And implementing these functons in RTEMS is not possible. > > One way to handle this, mentioned in the past is to let the openfirm.c > in libBSD handle the implementations and openfirm.h in RTEMS provide > the interface. This caused us to forward declare the device_t structure > in openfirm.h in RTEMS. > Is this approach OK? Is there any other better approach? > > 3) There are a few functions unimplemented in libBSD should we implement > them in the RTEMS API? > > Thanks, > Niteesh. > >
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
