On Tue, Aug 10, 2021, 9:58 AM Gedare Bloom <ged...@rtems.org> wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 5:34 AM Kuan-Hsun Chen <c00...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Benson, >> >> Regarding Discord for RTEMS, here you go: https://discord.gg/TKhmGt8p. >> >> Best, >> Kuan-Hsun >> >> On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 1:21 PM Mathew Benson <mben...@windhoverlabs.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Is there a Slack or Discord channel to discuss RTEMS? I don't want to >>> flood everybody's inbox with emails. >>> >>> > As well, for this kind of development work (porting RTEMS), you can bring > your discussions and questions over to de...@rtems.org. > > >> I want to port RTEMS to the Xilinx Zynq Ultrascale+ R5. I've taken the >>> RTEMS training, but that was a couple years ago. I think I'll be fine once >>> I can just get through the build system and can focus on just code, but the >>> build system seems very foreign to me. There still seems to be either >>> fragments of an old build system or just files that don't seem to serve any >>> purpose. It would appear that "/spec/build/bsps/arm/xilinx-zynqmp" is >>> where my build set definition begins, but then what is >>> "/bsps/arm/xilinx-zynqmp/config" for? >>> >>> > We haven't quite divorced ourselves from the older autotools build system, > but new BSPs/ports (including the aarch64) are not using the old build > system at all. > > The arm/xilinx-zynqmp is a BSP for only the 32-bit arm support of the Zynq > Ultrascale+ MPSOC specifically tested/used on the Ultra96. It was > contributed by Dornerworks. I guess this is a little confusing, because now > we also have bsps/aarch64/xilinx-zynqmp, which provides the 64-bit support. > At some point, we should be able to deprecate/drop the arm/xilinx-zynqmp > with the ability to configure the aarch64/xilinx-zynqmp to only run in > aarch32 mode. >
Probably worth starting a thread to ask Kinsey about that. I think the user was trying something like that at one point. I also think the BSP dornerworks contributed can run under Xen. So that would have to be accounted for But I'd focus in r5 simple bsp as an arm CPU with a simple goal of click tick and interrupts native but using openamp to talk to a host for as much as possible. I thought someone had openamp working but I just remember it has been discussed multiple times. > >> Also, everything still seems to be organized by architecture, the board. >>> How do you want the Zynq Ultrascale organized? It has multiple >>> architectures on the same SoC. Should it be under "arm" or "aarch64"? Is >>> it possible to build two kernels in a single step, or should it contain an >>> entry in "arm" for the R5 and an entry in "aarch64" for the A53? >>> >>> > It will be preferred to work on the aarch64 version for the A53 processor. > The R5 as a standalone would be a BSP under arm though. > > >> -- >>> *Mathew Benson* >>> CEO | Chief Engineer >>> Windhover Labs, LLC >>> 832-640-4018 >>> >>> >>> www.windhoverlabs.com >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> users mailing list >>> users@rtems.org >>> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/users >> >> >> >> -- >> Diese Mail wurde mobil geschrieben. Etwaige Rechtschreibfehler sind volle >> Absicht und als großzügiges Geschenk zu verstehen. >> _______________________________________________ >> users mailing list >> users@rtems.org >> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > _______________________________________________ > users mailing list > users@rtems.org > http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________ users mailing list users@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/users
