On Tue Dec 31 12:47:30 EST 2013, [email protected] wrote: > Thank you for the feedback, > i think "ctl" file and numbering scheme selection could do the job. And maybe > it could help to establish reasonable base for SPI and others. > > Is it safe to just generate new dev tree - to return either BCM, WiringPi or > board pin set - based on pin numbering scheme selection made by user? What > will happen if a process would try o read/write from/to pin when numbering > scheme is changed? I tried to look at devproc.c (what would happen when > process dies and something is reading its /proc entries) but i can’t see any > specific precautions there. > > I’m trying to learn something - including BCM and Plan 9, i don’t feel very > confident. But this Plan 9 BCM port really deserves more attention. :) I > appreciate any help or feedback. > > Regarding ISRs - this is not implemented yet. Polling at the moment is the > only option. But maybe "events” file, with data populated by interrupt > routine would be the answer. Is it correct Plan 9 way of doing things? QIO > looks very suitable for this purpose. > > I tried to look at 9front BCM tree, it seems to be a bit different (no > fakertc device for example) from the one at Bell Labs, is it by purpose or > just trees are not synched? I’m asking because i have 9front on my laptop and > i’d like to build BCM kernel there, and so i thought maybe i could use 9pi > from 9front image instead, but i’d like to know what is the status. > > Thank you, > Krystian > > Wiadomość napisana przez California Electric <[email protected]> w > dniu 30 gru 2013, o godz. 02:47:
the problem with the encoding of this email has been fixed. iso-2022-jp-2 should now be properly recognized. /n/atom/patch/tcs2022-jp-2 there are several further extensions which mostly embed multibyte characters, but i'm ignoring them for now. - erik
