Re: patch - at91 serial drivers assumed realtime response for DSR routines

[Nick Garnett <nickg at ecoscentric dot com>]

Øyvind Harboe <oyvind.harboe@zylin.com> writes:

> > I believe that code was never assigned, so we cannot use it. Since
> > your code is based on it, we would have problems accepting it also.
> 
> I seem to recall that Paul Sheer no longer was into eCos(did he have his
> own real-time os?). 
> 
> Is it realistic to get an assignment?

As Jani noticed, Paul has an assignment for a HAL port. In theory this
should cover any other contributions, including this patch. So it
looks like we can use his code.

> 
> > If we manage to solve that, I think I would also like to see use of
> > the PDC made a configuration option. It adds quite a lot of code and
> > data and is not needed on all AT91 targets.
> 
> That shouldn't be hard.

Good. In addition things like the buffer sizes and the receive timeout
should also be config options.

> 
> I've got an EB40a, and I've never gotten it to work >38400, even when
> I'm running everything from onchipo SRAM.

I've certainly had mine running at 115200 -- as I just tried it again
to check. However, that was only for a relatively short test. Maybe
it's not sustainable.

> 
> > The other AT91 parts all have just 8k of
> > on-chip SRAM which eCos does not use, apart from a few words for the
> 
> Are the other parts "flash-cheap-sram-expensive" as well?
>

Yep.


> It would be a shame to ditch a partial intermediate solution to the
> problem, in anticipation of a complete and correct solution that may
> take a long time to materialise. 

I agree. Given that the contribution is usable, and that it is
suitably configurable, I see no reason not to apply it.

-- 
Nick Garnett                    eCos Kernel Architect
http://www.ecoscentric.com      The eCos and RedBoot experts