William, what are you talking about? Why would I take what you say personally? You make these blanket statements about a technology you say you don’t know how to use and recommend that everyone else not use this technology. If you want to stay with a dead technology, that is your call, but there is no reason for anyone to stay away from RemoteProc/RPMSG. Manufacturers other than TI have embraced this technology which open up a range of cores you can interact with, such as DSP, CortexM4, PRU, etc. Yes, I know you told me you have no interest in the x15 so this is probably not important to you and I respect that.
Soapy, I use the drivers from Starterware and adapt them to work on the PRU, so I always use the C compiler. There is a github repo were several of the Starterware drivers have been ported to the PRU. This will save you a bunch of time. Regards, John > On Feb 10, 2016, at 2:47 PM, William Hermans <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Soapy, > > Yeah John always seems to take things personally, or out of context. I have > no problem what so ever with anyone using whatever they want. Including the > OP. My comment were merely to point out that remoteproc / rpmsg are not > finished, have known issues, and are a pain in the backside to initially get > working. > > So for someone using prussdrv, it is probably a bad idea to even start > thinking about using remoteproc / rpmsg. Unless they're just experimenting . > . . where then it could be a good learning experience I suppose. Me . . . I'd > rather something were fully functional and well documented before I invest my > time into it. remoteproc is neither of these. > > On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 3:42 PM, Soapy Smith <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > remoteproc definitely has some bad behavior. But what I am doing is just as > experimental, and no motors (all data transfer) involved. > > What is currently considered a reliable methodology for getting the most out > of the PRUs? > Also, what about C versus assembler? Will C alone suffice, or is there real > need to do some assembler? > I've found that there are actually two different assemblers, the older pasm > (apparently no longer supported), and the assembler part of clpru. > If you are just starting out in PRU work, should pasm even be considered? > > Regards, > Greg > > On Wednesday, February 10, 2016 at 4:49:49 PM UTC-5, William Hermans wrote: > I would recommend staying away from remoteproc and rpmsg at least until it's > out of experimental. > > > > -- > For more options, visit http://beagleboard.org/discuss > <http://beagleboard.org/discuss> > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "BeagleBoard" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout > <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. > > > -- > For more options, visit http://beagleboard.org/discuss > <http://beagleboard.org/discuss> > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "BeagleBoard" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout > <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>. -- For more options, visit http://beagleboard.org/discuss --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BeagleBoard" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
