From: Syed Faisal Akber <faisal.akber@utoronto.ca>
To: Raghavan <raghavan.viswanathan@wipro.com>
Cc: Linux-8086@Vger.Kernel.Org
Subject: Re: Porting ELKS
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 21:56:12 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0307282148090.29596-100000@SERVER1.AKBER.NET> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <023201c35018$2f68a450$8c06770a@wipro.com>
On Tue, 22 Jul 2003, Raghavan wrote:
> Fasal,
>
> Thanks very much for the reply.
>
> If I understand you correctly, we "can" have a port of ELKS as is without
> change in Memory model , but it
> will possibly be pedestrian.
No, you will have to make major changes in the way the memory and other
platform specific things are handled.
>
> I took a look at eCOS , but it looks like a nice full fledged OS with
> excellent features. Porting it might be
> a difficult task might be like an Year or so ...
>
Sounds about right if you are doing it alone with little knowledge of the
OS you are working on.
> I am inclined towards ELKS because I can possibly have a port like in 3 to 4
> months ...
> My priority is really to have applications running on Blackfin ASAP.
>
It would take longer to do this
> Also, why do we need to have gcc ported ?
Most of the opensource OS's require gcc as a compiler. This is because
they take advantage of its special features. Also GCC is more likely to
conform to C language standards than compilers provided by chip
manufacturers.
> Cant I use the native compiler provided by ADI guys for the Blackfin
> Processor ?
If you like but it would be more difficult to use and you would have to
port much more of the code to support the compiler. I have used VisualDSP
for BLACKfin and found it to have many quirks.
> Yeah..I need to tweak the compiler options to the respective equivalents on
> Blackfin Compiler ..; I am not seeing anything else ...
> Am I missing something ?
The two compilers are by no means the same at all. Using the commercial
compiler will cause you grief and cause your project timelines to be
extended 2 to 3 fold.
>
> Am I looking too optimistic to assume a 'as is' port of ELKS to Blackfin
> in 3 to 4 months ? I was thinking of taking Memory management after I have a
> 'working' version of ELKS ...
>
An AS IS port will not work for you.
> Does this sound reasonable ?
>
The eCOS does sound reasonable, but I think using ELKS would be in the
same realm. The regular Linux 2.6 kernel now has full support of MMU-less
systems. You might want to look at it as an alternative.
Regards,
Faisal
prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-07-29 1:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-07-18 10:57 Porting ELKS Raghavan
2003-07-19 20:12 ` Alan Cox
2003-07-20 19:42 ` Syed Faisal Akber
2003-07-21 5:09 ` Raghavan
2003-07-21 6:22 ` Riley Williams
2003-07-21 16:49 ` Syed Faisal Akber
2003-07-21 16:48 ` Syed Faisal Akber
2003-07-22 6:12 ` Raghavan
2003-07-29 1:56 ` Syed Faisal Akber [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Pine.GSO.4.44.0307282148090.29596-100000@SERVER1.AKBER.NET \
--to=faisal.akber@utoronto.ca \
--cc=Linux-8086@Vger.Kernel.Org \
--cc=raghavan.viswanathan@wipro.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox