From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6056 invoked by alias); 22 Dec 2010 14:54:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 6039 invoked by uid 22791); 22 Dec 2010 14:54:53 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from smtp-vbr15.xs4all.nl (HELO smtp-vbr15.xs4all.nl) (194.109.24.35) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 22 Dec 2010 14:54:46 +0000 Received: from athlon.lan (cust.7.108.adsl.cistron.nl [82.95.157.21]) by smtp-vbr15.xs4all.nl (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id oBMEsZ3P033415; Wed, 22 Dec 2010 15:54:36 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from rutger@cs.vu.nl) Message-ID: <4D121184.8090908@cs.vu.nl> Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 14:54:00 -0000 From: Rutger Hofman User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101208 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John Dallaway CC: Jonathan Larmour , eCos developers , Ross Younger Subject: Re: NAND technical review References: <4AC6218C.20407@jifvik.org> <4ACB4B58.2040804@ecoscentric.com> <4ACC0722.9020601@jifvik.org> <4ACCC13F.40009@cs.vu.nl> <4AD69BBE.6070103@jifvik.org> <4AD73386.4030300@cs.vu.nl> <4AD7CD29.1050701@jifvik.org> <4ADC777F.4020506@cs.vu.nl> <4ADD2CAB.4010000@jifvik.org> <4ADDAC7A.1070206@cs.vu.nl> <4ADE679D.1050900@jifvik.org> <4ADEFCFE.9060603@cs.vu.nl> <4AE1B864.1040409@jifvik.org> <4AE1CAD0.4080206@cs.vu.nl> <4AF91026.1060902@jifvik.org> <4D03CE75.2050607@dallaway.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <4D03CE75.2050607@dallaway.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact ecos-devel-help@ecos.sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-devel-owner@ecos.sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-12/txt/msg00010.txt.bz2 On 12/11/2010 08:18 PM, John Dallaway wrote: > Hi Jifl > > On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 07:03:02 +0000, Jonathan Larmour wrote: > >> I think I really have to get some comparative measurements on code size >> and performance at least. It's tricky when there is no common hardware. >> Not even a common architecture (given Jurgen's SAM9260 port isn't >> public). And no common chip even then. I think that unless someone is >> willing to port one or other to a common piece of hardware, then the >> only recourse is the synthetic target. >> >> I've now built both implementations and run all tests successfully on >> synth for both. Now I "just" need to finish porting rwbenchmark.c to (R). > > Do you see any opportunity to complete this review in the near future? > > John Dallaway Our project, RFID Guardian, has unexpectedly be cut out of funding. The project is now in the fridge until we find new funding, and that might take an arbitrarily long time. I am winding up loose ends in the software right now, and I expect I will be assigned as research programmer to some other project within the Computer Systems Group of the VU Amsterdam. I don't know for sure, but my expectation is that I will not be able to do more than bug fixes for my NAND package. Well, this kind-a breaks any promises I made regarding improvements/performance hacks to the package, and although I feel bad about that, there is some mitigation in the fact that more than a year has passed since in complete silence. Rutger Hofman VU Amsterdam