I will be very disappointed if this is the direction that NuttX moves in.
The design principles it was built on were great, and the OS is a lot of
fun to use, but if we are rewriting major portions with AI I am sad for the
future of the project. My vote remains a firm no.

Best,
Matteo

On Wed, Aug 5, 2026, 11:53 a.m. Alan C. Assis <[email protected]> wrote:

> I think we should try.
>
> In the past the native port was renamed to Legacy and the new HAL approach
> became the standard.
>
> Now we redo it: rename the current HAL to Legacy and the AI conversion
> could be tested as a new standard.
>
> This way those who are against using AI could still use the HAL without any
> issue.
>
> BR,
>
> Alan
>
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 12:44 PM Matteo Golin <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > I strongly oppose this suggestion, so my vote is no.
> >
> > Matteo
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 5, 2026, 11:42 a.m. Felipe Moura Oliveira <
> [email protected]
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Using AI in this situation might not be that bad. It is almost like
> > using a
> > > translator. We would take what already exists and works, and ask the AI
> > to
> > > adapt it to our case.
> > >
> > > For example, we could start with an isolated and simple driver, like
> SPI.
> > > We could ask the AI to use the 3rd-party HAL as a reference and convert
> > it
> > > using the standard patterns we already use in stm32. We can approach
> this
> > > incrementally, one driver at a time.
> > >
> > > If you agree, I can create a Proof of Concept (PoC) for this.
> > >
> > >
> > > *--Felipe Moura de Oliveira*
> > > Linkedin <https://www.linkedin.com/in/felipe-oliveira-75a651a0>
> > >
> > > On Wed, 5 Aug 2026 at 12:33 Matteo Golin <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > The ESP HAL change is a massive undertaking. Having AI relegated to
> do
> > it
> > > > means that we are going to get an even larger increase of AI
> generated
> > > PRs,
> > > > and now ones that entirely compose a very critical layer of a highly
> > > > popular vendor device collection on NuttX. Are we going to convince
> > > > Espressif developers to help maintain an AI generated copy of their
> > HAL?
> > > > How are we going to obtain their feedback in the development of a new
> > HAL
> > > > that lives within NuttX? Which developers are going to have an
> > > > understanding of this AI generated HAL? How will it be copyrighted?
> How
> > > > will we ensure it doesn't violate licensing?
> > > >
> > > > If we move to a NuttX maintained ESP HAL, which is already a large
> ask,
> > > it
> > > > should be created and maintained by NuttX incrementally to ensure
> that
> > > it's
> > > > stable, license compatible and has some support from our Espressif
> > > > contributors who have been maintaining our ESP support so far. AI
> > > > generating it in one shot is going to be a huge headache for
> > maintainers.
> > > > It also, in my opinion, pushes us one step closer to being yet
> another
> > > slop
> > > > project.
> > > >
> > > > Matteo
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2026, 11:26 a.m. Marco C. <[email protected]>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Can you please elaborate?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Marco Casaroli
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 17:23 Matteo Golin <[email protected]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > No.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2026, 11:21 a.m. Marco C. <
> [email protected]
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Should we AI-convert all espressif HAL into in-tree nuttx?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It would take a few days, and we can guarantee that the build
> are
> > > > > > > bit-by-bit matched in day zero, then we would have control of
> the
> > > > tree
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > will need to maintain it.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Does not sound too bad.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > What do you think?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Marco Casaroli
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 17:16 Tomek CEDRO <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > NuttX by design and by rule uses its own in-tree hardware
> > > > > > > > implementation for archs, platforms, mcus, boards, drivers,
> > etc,
> > > so
> > > > > it
> > > > > > > > is a self-contained and self-sufficient environment. There
> are
> > > two
> > > > > > > > exceptions to this rule Espressif and RaspberryPi,
> > unfortunately.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > We are aware of the issue and its pros and cons. There is not
> > > much
> > > > we
> > > > > > > > can do about ESP because of the design of their tools. Yes it
> > is
> > > a
> > > > > > > > moving target.. whoever worked with standalone esp-idf knows
> > > that.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Pros:
> > > > > > > > + There is a dedicated team in Espressif for NuttX
> development
> > > that
> > > > > > > > maintains the esp-sdk components.
> > > > > > > > + We have always up to date implementations and features.
> > > > > > > > + Easy migration between different ESP chips inside NuttX
> > > > ecosystem.
> > > > > > > > + We have new chips support out-of-the-box for free.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Cons:
> > > > > > > > - All ESP implementation in NuttX depends completely on
> > external
> > > > > > > > source that may disappear one day.
> > > > > > > > - If we freeze esp-sdk then we loose updates, features, and
> > > vendor
> > > > > > > > maintenance.
> > > > > > > > - We won't be able to cope with amount of changes in esp-sdk
> on
> > > our
> > > > > > own.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This situation is not perfect from NuttX point of view but
> > > optimal
> > > > > > > > from Espressif point of view, and provides working up-to-date
> > > > > > > > environment for NuttX ESP32* users. We have really good
> support
> > > > from
> > > > > > > > Espressif, unlike any other vendor. Any big company has its
> > goals
> > > > and
> > > > > > > > rules that we have no choice to follow, and there are other
> > chips
> > > > > that
> > > > > > > > require some binary blobs too.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I am not sure if we can do anything about it.. unless you
> want
> > to
> > > > > > > > start your own fully open-source esp-sdk? It would be perfect
> > to
> > > > have
> > > > > > > > fully open-source radio stacks but its astronomical amount of
> > > work.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The simplest solution to a stalled PR is just asking our
> > > community
> > > > to
> > > > > > > > keep pushing until its processed :-)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 12:21 AM Felipe Moura Oliveira
> > > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I would like to raise a concern about NuttX’s dependency on
> > > > > > Espressif’s
> > > > > > > > > esp-hal-3rdparty <
> > > https://github.com/espressif/esp-hal-3rdparty>
> > > > > > > > repository
> > > > > > > > > and discuss whether there is a way to give the NuttX
> > community
> > > > more
> > > > > > > > control
> > > > > > > > > over the changes required for its development.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The repository is publicly available, but it is maintained
> > and
> > > > > > > controlled
> > > > > > > > > by a single private company. As a result, external
> > > contributions
> > > > > are
> > > > > > > > > handled according to that company’s internal priorities and
> > > > > > > availability,
> > > > > > > > > which can make it difficult for the NuttX community to
> > address
> > > > > issues
> > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > block our own development.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > As a concrete example, I opened
> espressif/esp-hal-3rdparty#13
> > > > > > > > > <https://github.com/espressif/esp-hal-3rdparty/pull/13>,
> it
> > > has
> > > > > been
> > > > > > > > open
> > > > > > > > > for 28 days. It is a small change consisting of one commit
> > and
> > > 15
> > > > > > added
> > > > > > > > > lines across two header files—six lines in one file and
> nine
> > in
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > other.
> > > > > > > > > The PR has been acknowledged, but it has not received a
> > > technical
> > > > > > > review,
> > > > > > > > > and there is no expected completion date.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I understand that the Espressif maintainers have other
> > > > priorities,
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > > is not intended as criticism of the individuals involved.
> > > > However,
> > > > > I
> > > > > > > > > believe it illustrates a governance problem for NuttX:
> > changes
> > > > > > required
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > support NuttX on specific hardware may depend on a
> repository
> > > > whose
> > > > > > > > review
> > > > > > > > > process and priorities are outside the control of our
> > > community.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > My experience while porting Dropbear <
> > > > > > https://github.com/mkj/dropbear>
> > > > > > > > was
> > > > > > > > > quite different. We encountered some problems during the
> > port,
> > > > but
> > > > > > its
> > > > > > > > > maintainer actively helped by reviewing the code,
> suggesting
> > > > > changes,
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > quickly accepting the corresponding upstream pull requests.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I would therefore like to ask whether it would be possible
> to
> > > > > > maintain
> > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > fork of esp-hal-3rdparty under the Apache/NuttX umbrella,
> > with
> > > > > > > > appropriate
> > > > > > > > > NuttX committers having write access. Such a fork could
> > > continue
> > > > > > > tracking
> > > > > > > > > Espressif’s upstream repository, and generally useful
> changes
> > > > could
> > > > > > > still
> > > > > > > > > be submitted upstream whenever possible.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > If maintaining a repository under Apache is not feasible or
> > > > > > > > > appropriate, another
> > > > > > > > > suggestion I have is to start building our own HAL and via
> > > > kconfig
> > > > > > > select
> > > > > > > > > between the internal driver or the 3rd-party. If you have
> > other
> > > > > > > > > suggestions, please let's talk about them.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > *--Felipe Moura de Oliveira*
> > > > > > > > > Linkedin <
> > https://www.linkedin.com/in/felipe-oliveira-75a651a0
> > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to