Philippe Gerum wrote:
Hi Wolfgang,

First of all, thx for the CAN stack. Great job.

On Thu, 2006-08-03 at 09:58 +0200, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:


Now I would suggest to look at RTCAN (or what it will be called in the
end) and to discuss on this first concrete example how we can proceed
towards the sketched goal.

Looking forward to your feedback!
As you have said, maintaining a RTDM driver within the Xenomai repository clearly has some advantages but it also puts more burden onto the Xenomai maintainers and some developers might even prefer to keep thing separated. Therefore I suggest a simple RTDM add-on framework to support external RTDM drivers as well. They could be announced and listed on the Xenomai home page and then it would alsl be visible that there is a FireWire stack for Xenomai.

What I had first was a, a modified version of Philippe's script, to add the RTDM driver to the kernel tree. Similarly, as script could be used to add "loosely" the driver to Xenomai.

What do you think?

I can't speak for Jan wrt providing a RTDM add-on framework, but since
Xenomai is currently the reference platform for RTDM (at least, the
real-time infrastructure over which most of this work is experimented,
debugged and stabilized), I would rather seek integration of RTDM-based
drivers into the Xenomai tree, instead of a complete separation.

I understood that Jan also prefers driver integration into Xenomai. Just for some big external package like RTnet, an add-on would be nice to benefit from the Xenomai infrastructure (static linking, etc.).

The reason being that it makes sense (to a Xenomai maintainer, that is)
to reduce the odds of discrepancies between the core real-time
framework, the driver infrastructure and the client drivers, at least
while the first two are undergoing a rapid evolution. The same "in-tree
vs out-of-tree drivers" maintenance dilema which is known from the
kernel folks will also apply to us, if RTDM, and/or RTDM over Xenomai
are as successful as we wish, i.e. creating opportunities to provide
lots of RT drivers sharing a common infrastructure.
Said differently, the day a significant number of people will start
relying on a rich collection of RTDM-based drivers over Xenomai, we
_will_ have maintenance issues to deal with, anyway, starting with
answering a lot of questions on xenomai-whatever*. In such a case, I'd
rather reduce the odds of integration issues between Xenomai-RTDM and/or
RTDM/drivers. This said, I'm not saying that Xenomai should be the only
RTDM-based driver repository in the long run; but I'm arguing that
Xenomai could be used as a centripetal force to help developing and
stabilizing the RT driver ecosystem around RTDM.

OK, I can follow your arguments. It's fine for me.



Xenomai-core mailing list

Reply via email to