Re: arm64 zynq-mpsoc was broken

I am very interested in distributed building and testing hardware farms, and if someone is leading this project, I would be delighted to join. 获取Outlook for Android From: Tomek CEDRO Sent: Tuesday, February 4, 2025 2:10:02 AM To: dev@nutt

Re: GSoC 2025

Hi Tomek, I think the support already exist: https://nuttx.apache.org/docs/latest/applications/boot/nxboot/index.html BR, Alan On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 3:28 AM Tomek CEDRO wrote: > How about to try out NuttX as bootloader for other OS as the idea for GSoC > 2025? > > -- > CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http:/

HW Testing Platform Suggestion

Dear NuttXers, I think an issue when handling multiple boards is the physical peripherals and connectors from a board to another. It makes the test more complicated. Something we could explore is using a CPU card board format (such as MicroMod: https://www.sparkfun.com/micromod or Raspberry Syste

The behavior of spin_lock needs everyone's advice

Hi, The behavior of spin_lock needs everyone's advice After PR14578 was merged into the NuttX, the behavior of spin_lock() and spin_lock_irqsave() added the feature of disable the preemption: https://github.com/apache/nuttx/pull/14578 The spin lock b

Re: The behavior of spin_lock needs everyone's advice

On Wed, Feb 5, 2025 at 1:06 PM chao an wrote: > Hi, > > The behavior of spin_lock needs everyone's advice > > After PR14578 was merged into > the NuttX, the behavior of spin_lock() and spin_lock_irqsave() added the > feature of disable the preemption:

Re: The behavior of spin_lock needs everyone's advice

>It isn't an initialization problem, the real cause is some code abusing >spin lock(lock/unlock in the different thread). >After holding sched_lock in spinlock_irqsave, the api requires that the >lock/unlock come from the same thread. So this brings up a potential problem with spin_lock, right? >

Re: [DRUNX] Distributed Runtime and bUild for NuttX

As mentioned earlier, testing all boards is pointless, especially since the project has very limited resources. Choosing a few boards that will allow us to test as many things as possible is the most optimal approach. But first we should determine what things we want to test, not what boards. Know

Re: [DRUNX] Distributed Runtime and bUild for NuttX

Hi! First thing, I'm fairly new to nuttx so I might be off subject but here is my hot take on this subject. NuttX is offering support for a lot of boards, more than what DRUNX should require. Eg. stm32f3 family, offering support for all the boards would benefit the boards more than the NuttX code

Re: app/os sync creates many problems

Yes Sebastien, its a mess, I can see it crystal clear now, code base is not a pigsty for untested ideas, this needs to stop, thanks for sounding the alarm! I am just sad that Greg left because of that, I understand it now :-( GitHub is not important for me, its a tool that we use for code review,

Re: arm64 zynq-mpsoc was broken

I'd love to help too. I have a couple of STM32 nucleo boards that I can add to the farm. Best regards, Ludovic Vanasse ludovicvana...@gmail.com +1(514) 475-0447 On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 3:09 AM Simon Filgis wrote: > I would also like to join with: > SAMV7 > STM32 > ZCU102 (which I would love t

Re: app/os sync creates many problems

Great news, now that the build errors are sorted out, we are greeted with the * * * r u n t i m e   e r r o r s * * * the binary does not even start. it's stm32f429. tomorrow is jtag day. THIS IS FINE. I AM CALM. NO PROBLEM. I AM HAPPY. Sebastien On 04/02/2025 11:59, Sebastien Lorquet wro

Re: arm64 zynq-mpsoc was broken

I would also like to join with: SAMV7 STM32 ZCU102 (which I would love to run nuttx on - but I need help for that) -- Hard- and Softwaredevelopment Consultant Geschäftsführung: Simon Filgis USt-IdNr.: DE305343278 ISO9001:2015 On Tue,

[DRUNX] Distributed Runtime and bUild for NuttX

Hello world :-) Lets keep the distributed build and runtime test environment discussion in this mailing list thread. Here is the discussion issue on GitHub: https://github.com/apache/nuttx/issues/15730 Some things for start, at this point in time: 1. If anyone has better working name please s

Re: app/os sync creates many problems

I dont have a github account, this website looks like it is very important for you. you keep mentioning it at every occasion. linkage of nuttx and apps repo is a problem and I think more efforts should be made to decouple it even more. Otherwise you cant really tell anyone that they can have

Re: GSoC 2025

On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 1:34 PM Alan C. Assis wrote: > Hi Tomek, > I think the support already exist: > https://nuttx.apache.org/docs/latest/applications/boot/nxboot/index.html Thanks Alan :-) This seems to be a bootloader "for" NuttX? I meant crazy idea to use NuttX "as" the bootlader (i.e. in pl

Re: GSoC 2025

nxboot is NuttX as Bootloader On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 9:55 AM Tomek CEDRO wrote: > On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 1:34 PM Alan C. Assis wrote: > > Hi Tomek, > > I think the support already exist: > > https://nuttx.apache.org/docs/latest/applications/boot/nxboot/index.html > > Thanks Alan :-) This seems

Re: GSoC 2025

aaah :-) On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 1:56 PM Alan C. Assis wrote: > > nxboot is NuttX as Bootloader > > On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 9:55 AM Tomek CEDRO wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 1:34 PM Alan C. Assis wrote: > > > Hi Tomek, > > > I think the support already exist: > > > https://nuttx.apache.org/

Re: app/os sync creates many problems

On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 5:32 PM Sebastien Lorquet wrote: > Great news, now that the build errors are sorted out, we are greeted > with the > * * * r u n t i m e e r r o r s * * * > the binary does not even start. it's stm32f429. > tomorrow is jtag day. > THIS IS FINE. I AM CALM. NO PROBLEM. I AM

Re: GSoC 2025

Hi, there is still a possible work to do though. We could try to design an alternative algorithm that would not need three partitions. There are advantages of the current design (fast update even for big images, low flash wear, you always have a recovery present etc.), but it is mostly intend

Re: app/os sync creates many problems

The mess will not stop by using more tools. It will stop by taking hard decisions that will be resisted against, and learning to say NO sometimes, instead of accepting everything to please everyone. I am not sure the nuttx project is ready for the required changes. I have fixed the libboard

Re: [DRUNX] Distributed Runtime and bUild for NuttX

On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 11:42 AM Luchian Mihai wrote: > Hi! > First thing, I'm fairly new to nuttx so I might be off subject but here is > my hot take on this subject. Welcome and have fun Mihai! :-) > NuttX is offering support for a lot of boards, more than what DRUNX should > require. > > Eg.