Suggestions for BSPs to Obsolete
thomas.doerfler at embedded-brains.de
Wed Oct 21 05:41:05 UTC 2015
I have discussed dropping BSPs from support and from a technical point I
fully agree that this must be done. We should have some sort of active
BSPs which are regularily tested.
On the other hand, RTEMS can only live and grow, if it is attrative
enough for new users. Therefore we should not simply drop old BSP and
remove them from mentioning. Instead we should keep a list stating
"mr332 supported up to version 4.9". This indicates, that the basic code
is still available for taming the processor, but the structure and API
may need tinkering before working again with 4.12.
This is not so important for the really old BSPs (68k-based, various
other stuff), but also for those, which just pop into RTEMS but then are
not properly maintained (like possibly some STM/ARM stuff).
Am 21.10.2015 um 01:24 schrieb Chris Johns:
> On 21/10/2015 12:56 am, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>> On 10/20/2015 6:15 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>> Maybe we should build a list of BSP directories and find maintainers for
>>> each directory in some time frame. Then remove all BSPs without a
>> That is one approach. Another is defining tiers for the BSP
>> and being more aggressive about dropping them.
>> I think Chris has discussed his ideas on tiers before.
> I think both will be needed. We are moving to Phabricator and having
> areas developers can approve will be important. I am concerned if we do
> not things will sit and not be pushed through.
> I also think we will need tiers so we can manage the results from
> buildbot. There are active and current BSPs we have no way of testing
> because we do not have the hardware. If a user has a board and sets up a
> slave to allow testing for that BSP it will reach a higher tier and we
> have better testing.
> devel mailing list
> devel at rtems.org
embedded brains GmbH
email: Thomas.Doerfler at embedded-brains.de
Phone: +49-89-18 94 741-12
Fax: +49-89-18 94 741-09
PGP: Public key available on request.
Diese Nachricht ist keine geschäftliche Mitteilung im Sinne des EHUG.
More information about the devel