libi2c: Claiming driver slot failed

Sebastian Huber sebastian.huber at
Mon Aug 12 07:34:15 UTC 2013

On 2013-08-12 05:10, Chris Johns wrote:
> Nick Withers wrote:
>> It seems to me like there's an inversion of the App ->  BSP ->  RTEMS
>> abstraction going on here, where the app effectively needs to know
>> "black-box" details of the BSP, making maintenence and portability more
>> difficult and error prone than needs be...?
> I would like to see the drivers and the device table become unlimited just like
> the other unlimited resources in the kernel. The value becomes an allocation unit.

We should not start adding new tables, instead we should get rid of them. 
Propagating this major/minor number concept down to the lowest implementation 
levels is a major design problem from my point of view.  For drivers I would 
use IMFS generic nodes (e.g. a RTEMS device file system).

It is possible to strip down IMFS to get a directory + generic nodes subset 
with very low overhead.  It is also possible to use static only memory (no 
malloc()) for this.

Sebastian Huber, embedded brains GmbH

Address : Dornierstr. 4, D-82178 Puchheim, Germany
Phone   : +49 89 189 47 41-16
Fax     : +49 89 189 47 41-09
E-Mail  : sebastian.huber at
PGP     : Public key available on request.

Diese Nachricht ist keine geschäftliche Mitteilung im Sinne des EHUG.

More information about the users mailing list