GDB Stubs for PowerPC BSP with old-exceptions

Robert S. Grimes rsg at
Tue Feb 20 19:35:32 UTC 2007

Hi Thomas,

Thomas Doerfler wrote:
> I think it will not be so hard to support different MAC implementations
> in the same BSP (family). But this is a smaller issue for now, I would
> guess.
I agree.
> Getting the BSP licensing clean would also be an issue before commiting.
Of course.  From my point of view, my approach is valid and legal.  I
also believe it fits the RTEMS model, because all the code that would be
in the tree fits the licensing requirements.  However, I can't speak for
the RTEMS community, of course, regarding whether my strategy of relying
on an external library (i.e. Xilinx EDK) is acceptable or not. 
Normally, I can see not wanting this dependency, but in this case, as I
understand it, the EDK is (essentially) a requirement anyway.  Worst
case: use my approach for now, until someone is willing to rewrite the
Ethernet drivers.
> RTEMS has the "", which allows also to apply customizations
> to a given BSP, maybe this would be a vehicle to make the BSP as generic
> as possible.
I like this.  Of course, I'm not sure how to create/modify the .in
files, though I have mostly succeeded for my BSP.
> If you could give me:
> - a suitable Xilinx system configuration (memory map etc)
> - the BSP stuff you are using now
> - maybe some hints on how to use all this together
Will do, under separate emails.  Hopefully you don't have too
restrictive email attachment policies!
> then I would:
> - document what went wrong during my test drive (which might result in a
> good "getting started" documentation for others)
And I'll help fill in any wholes from my experience.
> - try to get the BSP running on my board
> - transition the exception handling model from old to new, if you like
Yes, I would indeed like this very much!
> - try to fix your "auto*" stuff
That would be awesome!

> wkr,
> Thomas.

More information about the users mailing list