This is the mail archive of the
ecos-maintainers@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the eCos project.
Re: Assignment query & tree organization
- From: Gary Thomas <gary at mlbassoc dot com>
- To: andrea michelotti <amichelotti at atmel dot com>
- Cc: eCos Maintainers <ecos-maintainers at ecos dot sourceware dot org>
- Date: Wed, 02 Jun 2004 08:29:49 -0600
- Subject: Re: Assignment query & tree organization
- Organization: MLB Associates
- References: <000801c448ac$68b629c0$330110ac@pitagora>
On Wed, 2004-06-02 at 08:17, andrea michelotti wrote:
> Hi,
> I already sent a mail to devel mailing list asking how to insert a new
> target into eCos source tree.
> Gary Thomas answered me and I think there is no problem to sign a copyright
> assignment if needed.
> Now I would like to evaluate the effort to get the contribution accepted
> into the tree.
> Let me resume what I did for our new processor in this way you can estimate
> the distance between what I did in the ecos tree and what you expect:
> 1) I created a new hal entry called diopsis/arch (part number:AT572D740)
> this is essentially a copy of arm/arch with modifications in vector.S and
> some vector routines for the DSP. Some other modifications are planned to
> extend diopsis capabilities.
> 2) I created a new hal entry called diopsis/atjtst that contains the code
> for two platforms that use diopsis. Most of code is derived from the
> AT91(EB0) porting.
> 3) I added two entries into ecos.db containing these two new platforms.
Why have you not just made the changes within the ARM tree? I really
don't like the idea of having two trees which cover ARM with slight
differences. The HAL is designed such that platform (or even family)
differences can be supported, but still within the architecture tree.
Could you send these changes (to this list) as a patch? Then we can
comment further.
--
Gary Thomas <gary@mlbassoc.com>
MLB Associates