From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <44BEAD52.8040309@domain.hid> Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 00:08:18 +0200 From: Jan Kiszka MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Xenomai-core] uvm/vxworks and uvm/vrtx are still being built References: <44BD77E6.6030004@domain.hid> <1153340912.5032.30.camel@domain.hid> In-Reply-To: <1153340912.5032.30.camel@domain.hid> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig0CDFDDAE4CEE867108EE2EC5" Sender: jan.kiszka@domain.hid List-Id: "Xenomai life and development \(bug reports, patches, discussions\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: rpm@xenomai.org Cc: xenomai-core This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig0CDFDDAE4CEE867108EE2EC5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Philippe Gerum wrote: > ... > To sum up, the UVM support is hard to explain to potential users, adds = a > fair amount of confusion when compared to using the direct syscall > interfaces from user-space, and can't evolve up to the point where I > could be happy with them. >=20 Thanks for clarifying. I never looked that deep into the UVM (except when I broke something with an arch patch). I just wrote that mail while waiting on the user-space part for being built ;). The UVM lib is default=3Dy, maybe something we should change soon as well. > PS: regarding the RTAI issue, most projects migrating from there to Xen= o > are AFAIK, converting their applications to use the native skin > directly, or even the POSIX one. Fact is that RTAI is more than 300 > calls, if you take into account all the interface variants. Given the > nature of what is actually a set of APIs, more than a single one, the > sandboxed environment the UVM brings does not fit the RTAI interfaces a= t > all. People really interested in having a 100% compatible RTAI skin ove= r > Xenomai that accurately emulates LXRT should definitely implement the > direct syscall interface for it. >=20 AFAIK no one insisted yet on user-space support for the RTAI skin. So this seconds that porting actually takes place at the application level. I guess it would take a rather large RTAI app so that writing a really compatible skin becomes worth the effort. Jan --------------enig0CDFDDAE4CEE867108EE2EC5 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEvq1SniDOoMHTA+kRAuuDAJ4+kTbW4C3uScAC2RkN+odYJ+QDKgCghNgJ 6xlXq9TMYC8hXEnTBB7ATJw= =gJmx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig0CDFDDAE4CEE867108EE2EC5--