Re: Problems with PXA270 migration from 4.20 to 5.0
From: Dean Ramsier (ramsiernospam_at_nospam.com)
Date: 02/25/05
- Next message: Dean Ramsier: "Re: CE 5.0 Memory Leak"
- Previous message: Prakash: "Re: Hanging operating system issue"
- In reply to: Mark Murawski: "Problems with PXA270 migration from 4.20 to 5.0"
- Next in thread: Mark Murawski: "Re: Problems with PXA270 migration from 4.20 to 5.0"
- Reply: Mark Murawski: "Re: Problems with PXA270 migration from 4.20 to 5.0"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 09:08:30 -0500
Well, I'd recommend a new code base :)
http://www.vibren.com/Products/Schema_BSP.htm
-- Dean Ramsier - eMVP Vibren Technologies "Mark Murawski" <mmurawski@nVoCtOhLaLnEkCyTou.com> wrote in message news:e9UmV$rGFHA.3724@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... > Hey everyone. > > We've been running CE 4.20 on our Mainstone derived PXA270 based > platform for a while now. We had a bit of trouble getting anyone to > give us a starting point BSP (long story), but we ended up basing our > BSP on Intel's Pocket PC 2003 BSP for Mainstone II. Aside from the > usual "What were they thinking when they wrote this?" issues, things > went pretty well. > > Just recently, I've started trying to move our platform to CE 5.0. I've > read a lot of the discussions here about following the new PQOAL model > versus moving an existing BSP from 4.20 over as-is, and I decided > (perhaps foolishly) to follow the PQOAL. In fact, my plan has been to > basically port the Mainstone II BSP from Platform Builder 5.0 to our > platform by cloning it, and then merging our changes we made in our PB > 4.20 BSP forward. Our 4.20 BSP and the 5.0 Mainstone BSP have a lot of > common roots. > > Sounds sane, right? Um...all except for the part where I realize that > Microsoft put very Mainstone hardware specific components into > platform\common and public\common. This stuff might be production > quality, but only if you intend to ship a Mainstone board as-is. > > My next plan was to identify each of this Mainstone tainted libraries, > copy them into my own BSP, and make my own modifications there. I'm > still going down this path, but I'm pretty sure I'm going to run into > problems trying to avoid namespace collisions with header files. I > mean, I'm still using XLLP stuff. Just, my own copy of it. > > So, has anyone else run into the same challenge? If so, have you come > up with a better solution than my current course of action? > > For reference, here's a quick list of the libraries I've spotted so far > that have lots of Mainstone specific pieces in them. (The specifics > include stuff like specific GPIO assignments, Mainstone BLR references, > etc.) > > *- $(_COMMONOAKROOT)\lib\$(_CPUINDPATH)\pxa27x_xllp.lib > *- $(_PLATCOMMONLIB)\$(_CPUINDPATH)\oal_intr_pxa27x.lib > > (Plus, all the headers. Why is this stuff in the common directories > when it is so tightly tied to a specific hardware implementation?!?!?) > > You know, after writing this out...it doesn't seem as bad as I thought > originally. Hmm... > > Mark Murawski > Lead Software Engineer > Vocollect, Inc.
- Next message: Dean Ramsier: "Re: CE 5.0 Memory Leak"
- Previous message: Prakash: "Re: Hanging operating system issue"
- In reply to: Mark Murawski: "Problems with PXA270 migration from 4.20 to 5.0"
- Next in thread: Mark Murawski: "Re: Problems with PXA270 migration from 4.20 to 5.0"
- Reply: Mark Murawski: "Re: Problems with PXA270 migration from 4.20 to 5.0"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
|