Total newcomer over here, hope the community doesn't mind me chipping in, but I totally agree with Michał and Alan.
Espressif is the only company I see legitimately engaging with FOSS, but not only are they the only exception, their incentives can change any time. Let's make the right decision now. On Fri, Oct 2, 2026 at 11:19 PM Alan C. Assis <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Michał, > > Exactly, no OEM will do the port because they like NuttX or because they > want it to become a bigger project. > > They will do it just because other companies are using it and paying for > their chips. > > If they lose their customers they will move their developers to another > project (like Zephyr), so their HAL will stop receiving attention, even > communities PRs will be ignored. > > BR, > > Alan > > On Fri, Oct 2, 2026 at 10:24 AM Michał Łyszczek <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > On 2026-10-02 08:25:49, Alan C. Assis wrote: > > > The code duplication is only one of the issues raised there. > > > > > > I think the first and most important issue they are concerned about is > > the > > > HAL quality itself. > > > > > > Since this is a third party code you have no way to change or improve > it. > > > You can try sending a patch, but the history proves they might ignore > it. > > Problem with HAL is also that they are quite often designed NOT with RTOS > > like > > nuttx or zephyr in mind, but with something like freertos. And you may > get > > an > > interface that is impossible to nicely integrate with OS WITHOUT > > duplicating > > things like checking input arguments or worse, having a double buffering. > > In > > effect HAL with RTOS will not only be slower but also use more flash and > > ram > > memory. > > > > Then - as it has been mentioned already - you have to rely on OEM to > > support > > you. And trust me. THEY. WILL. STOP. At one point. As soon as it stops > > giving > > them money. OEM is not your friend. They don't add support for OSes > > because they > > are nice guys. They do this to get more money. Period. Once it costs them > > more > > than it gives back, support WILL BE cut. > > > > I fully agree with Alan that it makes much more sense to support less > > hardware, > > but do it well. This is not a race. Nobody gets paid for supporting more > > hardware. We all do this for the fun of it not money. Some people will > > give much > > more, some will just send few patches here and there. > > > > This is a hobby project. Hobby project should mostly care about > > maintainers and > > non-commercial end users. If company wants to use an open source project, > > they > > may very well invest some bucks into it - like writing designated drivers > > and > > not lazy ass HAL way. And call it "support". If they don't want to put > > money > > into it, then they can sod off. They are not doing anyone any favors with > > they > > crappy HALs. > > > > You guys should start thinking more in terms of "what OEM can do for us" > > rather > > than "what can we do for the OEM". They are the ones with money and > > interest to > > have support for their obscure new hardware so they can sell more chips. > > > > Open source projects should focus much more on making something you can > be > > proud > > of. Not something that gets used the most - that usually comes later with > > quality. I'm not very active, but I'm proud of writing and merging > drivers > > I > > have written from scratch. Using HAL to implement driver would feel like > > work - > > full focus on getting shit done, zero focus on having fun doing that. > > > > I'm not voting or anything, because I don't feel like I'm being active > > enough > > here to have that right. But if it were up to me, I would just ban any > > form of > > HAL right away. If company wants to use MY (and other maintainers) work > > they > > are getting FOR FUCKING FREE, they can afford putting some resources back > > into > > community to make it better (and not worse with they cheap ass HALs). > > > > Sorry for getting triggered. I don't like seeing good folks bending over > > for > > companies. And no, JUST having more chip supported is not good for end > > users. > > Having GOOD software is good for end user. Less is more. > > >
