OpenRISC port

OpenRISC port

[Piotr Skrzypek]

Dear eCos Maintainers,

Together with my colleages from Ant Micro, we have updated the
OpenRISC port. We discovered that the OpenRISC HAL was not working
anymore, probably due to ABI change. We have also added few device
drivers. All changes to the code were introduced against the code in
eCos repository. This makes me believe there is no problem with
licensing.

The code still has some identified bugs that should be fixed. Once we
get it done, we would like to contribute the code to the eCos
repostory if possible.

There is one more problem and we seek your advice. Current OpenRISC
architecture is called OpenRISC1000 (aka or1k). There is an update
foreseen. The new architecture will be called OpenRISC2000 (aka or2k)
and it will not be backwards compatible. How should we structure the
HAL directory to take into account the update in the future?

Here is the note about the update:
http://antmicro.com/OpenSource/OpenRISC-eCos

We have a small wiki page that describes the port here:
http://opencores.org/or1k/ECos

The code is hosted on OpenCores SVN, here:
http://opencores.org/ocsvn/openrisc/openrisc/trunk/rtos/ecos-3.0

Thanks in advance,
Piotr Skrzypek

Re: OpenRISC port

[Tomas Frydrych]

Hi,

On 23/01/13 09:36, Piotr Skrzypek wrote:
> Together with my colleages from Ant Micro, we have updated the
> OpenRISC port. We discovered that the OpenRISC HAL was not working
> anymore, probably due to ABI change. We have also added few device
> drivers. All changes to the code were introduced against the code in
> eCos repository. This makes me believe there is no problem with
> licensing.

This is excellent news; I looked what could be done about updating the
ecos orc platform based on the OpenRISC fork about a year ago after the
excellent OpenRISC talk at FOSDEM, but was not able to find out who the
real authors were so that the copyright re-assignment could be done.


> There is one more problem and we seek your advice. Current OpenRISC
> architecture is called OpenRISC1000 (aka or1k). There is an update
> foreseen. The new architecture will be called OpenRISC2000 (aka or2k)
> and it will not be backwards compatible. How should we structure the
> HAL directory to take into account the update in the future?

I am not a maintainer, but since these are two different architectures,
my inkling would be toward renaming the current architecture to
something like 'hal/openrisk1k' so that later on you can add
'hal/openrisk2k'.

Tomas