From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Syed Faisal Akber Subject: Re: Porting ELKS Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 21:56:12 -0400 (EDT) Sender: linux-8086-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: References: <023201c35018$2f68a450$8c06770a@wipro.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: In-Reply-To: <023201c35018$2f68a450$8c06770a@wipro.com> List-Id: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Raghavan Cc: Linux-8086@Vger.Kernel.Org On Tue, 22 Jul 2003, Raghavan wrote: > Fasal, > > Thanks very much for the reply. > > If I understand you correctly, we "can" have a port of ELKS as is without > change in Memory model , but it > will possibly be pedestrian. No, you will have to make major changes in the way the memory and other platform specific things are handled. > > I took a look at eCOS , but it looks like a nice full fledged OS with > excellent features. Porting it might be > a difficult task might be like an Year or so ... > Sounds about right if you are doing it alone with little knowledge of the OS you are working on. > I am inclined towards ELKS because I can possibly have a port like in 3 to 4 > months ... > My priority is really to have applications running on Blackfin ASAP. > It would take longer to do this > Also, why do we need to have gcc ported ? Most of the opensource OS's require gcc as a compiler. This is because they take advantage of its special features. Also GCC is more likely to conform to C language standards than compilers provided by chip manufacturers. > Cant I use the native compiler provided by ADI guys for the Blackfin > Processor ? If you like but it would be more difficult to use and you would have to port much more of the code to support the compiler. I have used VisualDSP for BLACKfin and found it to have many quirks. > Yeah..I need to tweak the compiler options to the respective equivalents on > Blackfin Compiler ..; I am not seeing anything else ... > Am I missing something ? The two compilers are by no means the same at all. Using the commercial compiler will cause you grief and cause your project timelines to be extended 2 to 3 fold. > > Am I looking too optimistic to assume a 'as is' port of ELKS to Blackfin > in 3 to 4 months ? I was thinking of taking Memory management after I have a > 'working' version of ELKS ... > An AS IS port will not work for you. > Does this sound reasonable ? > The eCOS does sound reasonable, but I think using ELKS would be in the same realm. The regular Linux 2.6 kernel now has full support of MMU-less systems. You might want to look at it as an alternative. Regards, Faisal