From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <47C277E4.3090506@domain.hid> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 09:10:12 +0100 From: Jan Kiszka MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <606588375@domain.hid> <200802250451.22841.berlemont.hauw@domain.hid> In-Reply-To: <200802250451.22841.berlemont.hauw@domain.hid> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: jan.kiszka@domain.hid Subject: Re: [Xenomai-help] Xenomai and Virtex II Pro (PPC405) List-Id: Help regarding installation and common use of Xenomai List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Joachim Meyer Cc: xenomai@xenomai.org Alexis Berlemont wrote: >>> Which framework ? >> An application, basing on this framework (written by someone at my college, >> who isn't here anymore), which bases on rtai, was running on linux on a >> celeron. This application should be ported to the Virtex 2 Pro by me. So I >> ask myself how hard it would be, to use Xenomai (perhaps with this "rtai >> skin??") instead of rtai. > > It depends on the RTAI functions which are called in your framework. I am not > sure that 100% of the API is implemented. I did not have time to have a > closer look... Maybe someone else has the answer... The RTAI skin is kernel-space only so far, and it doesn't implement to full set of RTAI services - which would be a lot of work to do... Take a look at the Native API of Xenomai. It is quite similar to RTAI, but you may find it way more consistent. Unless there is a hard requirement to keep the OS layer of that frame work at RTAI level, adopting to Native services should be the preferred way to go. Jan