On 9/7/21 3:39 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: > On 08/07/2021 03:11, Kinsey Moore wrote: >> I wonder why this never came up with Zynq or QorIQ. Maybe no one wanted to >> run >> network tests on the alternate interfaces because dev boards with those >> interfaces configured didn't exist? It's possible that the ukphy driver could >> be improved and this entire problem just goes away or we ban that driver from >> the default configuration for multi-interface BSPs and the problem goes away. > > The QorIQ BSP uses a device tree. > > The chips will get more and more complex. Managing this complexity with hand > written C preprocessor defines is a dead end from my point of view. Device > trees > allow you to provide a generic BSP which is initialized for a particular board > using the device tree. Compared to other operating systems, the device tree > support and generic device enumeration in RTEMS is a bit under developed. See > for example: > > https://docs.zephyrproject.org/latest/guides/dts/index.html#dt-guide >
I agree and this is well said. I am concerned an ad-hock implementation leaves us with fragmented and hard to maintain support at the BSP level. Chris _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
