[GSOC] Unified APIs Project Final Report

[Vipul Nayyar]

Hello,

Done !!

http://rtems.org/wiki/index.php/GSOC_2013_:_Unified_APIs

Regards
Vipul Nayyar 



________________________________
 From: "Rempel, Cynthia" <cynt6007 at vandals.uidaho.edu>
To: Vipul Nayyar <nayyar_vipul at yahoo.com>; Joel Sherrill <joel.sherrill at oarcorp.com> 
Cc: "rtems-devel at rtems.org" <rtems-devel at rtems.org> 
Sent: Tuesday, 24 September 2013 2:06 AM
Subject: RE: [GSOC] Unified APIs Project Final Report
 

Hi Vipul Nayyar,

That sounds great :) Looking forward to your continued participation in the rtems development community!

Could you post this to your project wiki on the rtems wiki?  That way the next student that picks up the project will know where you left off.

Thanks!
Cindy
________________________________________
From: rtems-devel-bounces at rtems.org [rtems-devel-bounces at rtems.org] on behalf of Vipul Nayyar [nayyar_vipul at yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 11:09 AM
To: Joel Sherrill
Cc: rtems-devel at rtems.org
Subject: [GSOC] Unified APIs Project Final Report

Hello,

Since this being the end of the coding period of GSOC 2013, I'm submitting my report for the work done this summer. More detailed glance into the work done can be taken at my blog (http://www.vipulnayyar.com/) across different blog posts written over time during the GSOC timeline.

I've created a separate repository on github<https://github.com/vipulnayyar/gsoc2013_rtems/> ( https://github.com/vipulnayyar/gsoc2013_rtems/ ) where all the code & work done by me can be found. I'll briefly take you through the work done & stuff left in the pipeline below :

Contributed Work

  *   Submitted patches to remove legacy code from RTEMS bsps which have been accepted & are currently a part of the official RTEMS repository. These patches were submitted for bsps : csb337, csb336, edb7312, gumstix, gba, rtl22xx, & pc386.


  *   Since more than about 100 bsps are a part of RTEMS, so guided instructions & rules for continuing this work has been compiled & is present in my github repository & publicly available on a Google drive document.


  *   Studied the PIC interrupt model based on the comments written in irq-generic.h & my own observations. Information about PIC Interrupt Model API  is added to the current RTEMS documentation.


  *   For bsps that do not use the generic interrupt framework , rules to initialize & use it are written and present in the code repository. These rules specify how bsp specific code & the generic code works together & handles Interrupt Service Routines before, during and after an interrupt has occurred.


  *   Based on my observations from model bsp lpc24xx , rules were compiled based on an ongoing discussion in the community on how bsp support files are included & compiled. These rules specify which set of files are a must to be used by a bsp & in which directory they all must lie. These rules will in future help in maintaining a unified pattern for BSP file organization.


  *   Since the above rules are very difficult to check manually for each bsp, so a bash script was written merging the functionality of check_submission from rtems-testing. This script is supposed to be a final test for any bsp developer before his code is accepted into RTEMS, so as to check whether that the bsp code submitted follows this unified pattern of file organization & formatting or not.

To be Done

  *   Continue working with the RTEMS community to strengthen the unified way rules and include more checks in it as suggested.


  *   Increase code coverage for removing legacy support from bsps by converting them to PIC interrupt support model.


  *   Submit regular patches so as to correct the warnings flagged by the new check_submission script in rtems-testing.

I sincerely hope that my work will benefit the RTEMS community as a whole in the long run & avoid incurring any more technical debt  so that someone else doesn't have to pay for it. I gladly look forward to working with RTEMS developers in future while continuing the work done in GSOC & maybe more !!

Regards
Vipul Nayyar
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20130925/b931d5b9/attachment-0001.html>