RE: [ECOS] malloc vs. new

["Koeller, T." <Thomas.Koeller@baslerweb.com>]

Hi Tim,

first of all, before doing anything else you should get
the latest version of the patch that I just uploaded to
ecos-patches@sources.redhat.com. Now to your questions:

1) Yes, this is a platform-dependent parameter and
   therefore should go into the platform cdl file.

2) The short answer is that I just took the LED code as
   it were without modifying it. In the latest version I
   implemented the function hal_diag_led() which the
   original code defined in hal_diag.h, but did not
   actually implement. It tries to get setting those
   LEDs right by using a lookup table for the PIO bits,
   but I haven't tested it so far - maybe you can?

3) Yes, I agree. These definitions should go into
   plf_io.h.

4) Generally, everything platform-specific should go
   into that platform's directory and thus become a
   part of the platform hal package.

tk

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tim Drury [mailto:tdrury@siliconmotorsports.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 6:19 AM
> To: Koeller, T.
> Cc: ecos-discuss (E-Mail)
> Subject: Re: [ECOS] malloc vs. new
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas,
> 
> I copied your eb40 directory and created an eb40a directory.  
> I changed
> everything over to match the eb40a eval board, but I have a 
> couple questions:
> 
> 1) in var/current/cdl/hal_arm_at91.cdl the CPU clock speed is 
> defined.  But
> the eb40a runs at 66MHz, not the 32.768MHz of the eb40.  Should I pull
> that constant out and put it in 
> eb40*/var/current/cdl/hal_arm_at91_eb40*.cdl?
> 
> 2) eb40/current/src/eb40_misc.c is confusing.  The eb40 
> schematic shows that
> pulling a PIO pin low turns the LED on, but the code shows 
> setting the SODR
> bit (setting PIO pin high) turning the LED on.  And what in 
> the world does
> _at91_led() really do? It looks like it just strobes the data 
> LED on briefly.
> What is that used for?
> 
> 3) also about eb40_misc.c: both function take an 'int led' 
> argument which is
> supposed to be a correctly bit-mapped value to the LED/PIO 
> pins.  Shouldn't
> we have some #defines for the LEDs so a user can call, for example:
> set_leds(LED2 | LED4);
> Keep in mind the eb40a has 8 LEDs and none are labelled CLOCK and DATA
> like the eb40.  Where would be the appropriate place to put 
> these #defines?
> 
> 4) var/current/include/hal_platform_setup.h.  This file will 
> also change for
> eb40a.  Should it be moved to eb40a/current/include?  Mostly just the
> memory mapping data.  Oddly enough, the wait states for the Flash are
> the same for the eb40a and the eb40.  The eb40a is running at 66MHz,
> but the flash chip (AT49BV1614) is also faster and the numbers work 
> out the same:
> tOE = 90ns -> 90ns/15.2ns = 5.92 ~= 6 WS before
> tDF = 25ns -> 25ns/15.2ns = 1.64 ~= 2 WS after
> 
> The ram wait states (1WS before and 1 WS after) has not been tested.
> I originally calculated this to be correct for the eb40, but 
> Atmel said to
> use 3WS before and 4WS after which I think is overkill.  I'll 
> test this when
> I get this port to compile.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> -tim
> 
> 
> On Tuesday 25 June 2002 05:33 am, Koeller, T. wrote:
> > Scott,
> >
> > it may be of interest to you that I did quite a lot of work on the
> > AT91/EB40. I separated the existing HAL into an 
> AT91-specific variant
> > HAL and a EB40-specific platform HAL. This is the standard 
> ecos way of
> > dealing with platforms that are variations of a common underlying
> > archtecture. You can then create a platform HAL with minimum effort,
> > and there you can set your platform's parameters to 
> anything you like
> > without changing the AT91 HAL. This also means that you do 
> not have to
> > release your source code under the GPL, as would be the 
> case if you just
> > modify an existing component.
> >
> > I submitted my changes to the ecos-patches mailing list, 
> but the haven't
> > been approved yet. There's also a newer, improved version 
> that I did not
> > submit yet, because such submissions are not currently 
> processed. However,
> > if anyone is interested, I'd like to share my code with him/her.
> >
> > tk
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Scott Dattalo [mailto:scott@dattalo.com]
> > > Sent: Monday, June 24, 2002 9:23 PM
> > > Cc: ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com
> > > Subject: RE: [ECOS] malloc vs. new
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, 24 Jun 2002, Scott Dattalo wrote:
> > >
> > > <snip>
> > >
> > > I fixed my memory problem.
> > >
> > > It turns out that my application is big. It's too big to 
> fit into the
> > > memory footprint provided bythe At91EB40 evaluation board. I
> > > know in the
> > > future that I will be putting the application in different
> > > hardware, but
> > > I'm using the eCos configuration that's available for the
> > > EB40. To make a
> > > long story short, the memory foot print is defined for 
> the AT91EB40 in
> > > here:
> > >
> > > ecos/packages/hal/arm/at91/current/include/pkgconf/
> > >
> > > The RAM size is 0x80000. To work around this, I made a backup
> > > of pkgconf/
> > > and changed all references of 0x80000 to 0x200000 and that works!
> > >
> > > I know that one shouldn't go around trampling on the ecos
> > > sources in such
> > > a way. But, what is the preferred way to change the memory
> > > foot print?
> > > Should I create a new cdl for my hardware based on (say) the
> > > arm/at91/ and
> > > edit those hardware-specific changes? It doesn't appear that
> > > fundamental
> > > configuration such as this can be changed in ecos.ecc. (You
> > > *can* change
> > > the size of the memalloc heap, but you can't make it 
> bigger than the
> > > memory footprint that's defined in pkgconf/, AFAICT).
> > >
> > > Scott
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Before posting, please read the FAQ:
> > > http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
> > > and search the list archive: 
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss
>
> -----------------------------------------------
> Thomas Koeller, Software Development
>
> Basler Vision Technologies
> An der Strusbek 60-62
> 22926 Ahrensburg
> Germany
>
> Tel +49 (4102) 463-390
> Fax +49 (4102) 463-46390
>
> mailto:Thomas.Koeller@baslerweb.com
> http://www.baslerweb.com
----------------------------------------------- 
Thomas Koeller, Software Development 

Basler Vision Technologies 
An der Strusbek 60-62 
22926 Ahrensburg 
Germany 

Tel +49 (4102) 463-390 
Fax +49 (4102) 463-46390

mailto:Thomas.Koeller@baslerweb.com 
http://www.baslerweb.com 



-- 
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss