Query related to PRU drivers of BeagleBone Black

[Christian Mauderer]

Hello Utkarsh Rai,

I haven't followed the project tightly. So I can't tell much regarding 2
and 3. I added Nils (who did the GSoC 2019 project) to CC so maybe he
can give you some more details.

Regarding 1: In RTEMS we generally prefer the FreeBSD code due to the
BSD license. Most code in Linux is GPL code. Also it's a great license
for desktop applications it would make a lot of problems in the typical
RTEMS use cases. RTEMS applications are (nearly) always statically
linked with the system into a single binary. Therefore GPL would spread
into the application code too. In some cases that is no problem but
there are use cases where the user don't want or is not allowed to open
the application due to various reasons. Think of automotive or space
applications. They sometimes have quite tough regulations.

Another reason: We have a well working infrastructure to import FreeBSD
code called rtems-libbsd. So importing from FreeBSD is a lot simpler
then importing from Linux.

Best regards

Christian

On 14/12/2019 19:44, Utkarsh Rai wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> I am interested in contributing to the PRU drivers of the BeagleBone
> Black BSP. I have briefly overviewed the work that has been done
> <https://github.com/nilhoel1/rtems-pru>on the PRU drivers. I have few
> queries regarding the same-
> 1. Instead of using Linux based UIO drivers, FreeBSD based drivers have
> been used. Is there an advantage/specific-feature that FreeBSD drivers
> have over Linux ones for this choice?
> 2. What all are the driver features that have still not been
> developed/debugged/tested?
> 3. How should I proceed to test the driver features on the BeagleBone Black?
> I would be very grateful if I could get a few indicators on the
> above-mentioned queries.
> 
> Thank you, Regards.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel at rtems.org
> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>