libbsd: rtems-bsd-subr.c and rtems-bsd-cyclecount.c
Jennifer.Averett at OARcorp.com
Wed Apr 18 14:05:11 UTC 2012
I made a seperate file on the rtems-bsd-subr.c because I didn't know if we would end
up adding more thatn one routine in there by the time it works correctly and I feared putting
it in the bsd file would make it too cluttered and harder to track. However, I can move
the code into the bsd file if that is what is decided.
The cyclecount method is in a board dependent file (cpu.h) which was defined to be an
empty file for us. Would it be better to put it into the file we defined as empty and make
it an RTEMS defined file?
On-Line Applications Research
From: rtems-devel-bounces at rtems.org [rtems-devel-bounces at rtems.org] On Behalf Of Sebastian Huber [sebastian.huber at embedded-brains.de]
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 3:59 AM
Subject: libbsd: rtems-bsd-subr.c and rtems-bsd-cyclecount.c
do we really need separate files for simple replacement functions? It is
better to have the FreeBSD code and the RTEMS replacement in one place.
Firstly we see what it should do and secondly we notice updates in the FreeBSD
Things are different if we replace complete implementations like MUTEX(9), e.g.
Every libbsd file should include
as the first header file. This file includes some standard header files in the
Sebastian Huber, embedded brains GmbH
Address : Obere Lagerstr. 30, D-82178 Puchheim, Germany
Phone : +49 89 18 90 80 79-6
Fax : +49 89 18 90 80 79-9
E-Mail : sebastian.huber at embedded-brains.de
PGP : Public key available on request.
Diese Nachricht ist keine geschäftliche Mitteilung im Sinne des EHUG.
rtems-devel mailing list
rtems-devel at rtems.org
More information about the devel