This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the eCos project.
[Bug 1000761] eCos support for MPC5xxx MCUs
- From: bugzilla-daemon at bugs dot ecos dot sourceware dot org
- To: backlog at bugs dot ecos dot sourceware dot org
- Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 13:54:52 +0100
- Subject: [Bug 1000761] eCos support for MPC5xxx MCUs
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org/>
Please do not reply to this email. Use the web interface provided at:
Jonathan Larmour <email@example.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
--- Comment #31 from Jonathan Larmour <firstname.lastname@example.org> 2012-05-31 13:54:43 BST ---
(In reply to comment #30)
> Hi eCos Maintainers,
> we have continued to develop that MPC5xxx branch of eCos and would like to come
> back to contribute to the main tree. We are currently planing a distribution
> launch of one of the MPC56xx MCUs, where we would like to see a contribution
> announcement on the eCos website in the 1st week of July. How much time do you
> need to integrate our contribution into the main CVS ? I am not talking about
> modifications to the existing files, just entirely new files for the MPC5xxx
> line of products ?
We do want code to be maintainable, meet coding standards, and work correctly
not just with the default configuration of the most common packages, but with
all packages in all configurations (well, in theory - in practice, it's hard to
test this without an automated testing infrastructure, but we do try and get as
good as we can).
So with that in mind, it all depends on how much, if any, work would be
required for the ports to meet those basic standards. Since there have already
been comments, and you've been receptive to comments in the past, hopefully
there are not many issues remaining, but ultimately the only way to know is to
post your latest code.
If you can post the code, and we can get a good turnaround on review comments,
then 1st week of July should be achievable.
One little comment I can make just on the highest level structure which I don't
think anyone else has made is that the hal/powerpc/ layer is starting to get
crowded, and this contribution would add 18 more directories at that level. I
think a new hal/powerpc/mpc5xxx directory hierarchy is called for, with the
existing hal/powerpc/mpc5xxx directory in your contrib renamed to
hal/powerpc/mpc5xxx/var (in line with the precedent in other architectures).
The package contents should be able to stay exactly the same - I'm only talking
about moving the root of each package, and updating the ecos.db in line with
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.ecos.sourceware.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.