Patches for Newlib and RTEMS

[Gedare Bloom]

On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 10:46 AM, Ralf Corsepius
<ralf.corsepius at rtems.org> wrote:
> On 07/08/2013 03:33 PM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> the patches sent today for Newlib and RTEMS require a re-build of the
>> tool chain.
>
>
> => These patches are not adequat at this point in time.
>
> In particuliar RTEMS needs to be adapted to not rely upon them.
>
Please elaborate on the particular weaknesses that render these
patches inadequate. Your unqualified rejection of these patches lacks
sufficient detail.

>
>>  The changes are
>>
>> 1. Removal of the thread-specific atexit() support to reduce the size of
>> struct _reent.  See discussion on the Newlib list.
>>
>> 2. Usage of __DYNAMIC_REENT__ for SMP support and simpler context
>> switching.
>>
>> 3. POSIX cleanup push/pop implementation change.
>
>
> Whether these patches make sense is a different question. I think they are
> too intrusive and should all be rejected.
>
The development of SMP support in RTEMS is necessarily complicated.


> Ralf
>
> PS.: Honestly, RTEMS needs to return to a more organized development model.
> The way RTEMS currently is being developed to me qualifies as unprofessional
> hackery.
>
If anything, the current model of development is more organized and
professional than before. Posting patches for review prior to
committing is a more scalable and manageable approach than the prior
state in which developers posted commits that were then peer-reviewed
on the VC list directly. You are welcome to make suggestions on other
ways that RTEMS development workflow can improve.

-Gedare

>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtems-devel mailing list
> rtems-devel at rtems.org
> http://www.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/rtems-devel