Sebastian, Makes sense. I think I understand the idea a little better now, we are using the linux uapi i2c API, but not the actual i2c bus and device driver implementations from linux, right?
For the Pi ( and others like the Beagleboard ) we need to come up with an i2c BSP bus driver ( similar to cadence-i2c.c/h ) then a set of i2c device drivers to go in cpukit/dev/i2c. Do the individual device drivers, such as cpukit/dev/i2c/gpi-nxp-pca9535.c, resemble the equivalent linux driver? Thanks, Alan On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 1:01 AM, Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > > On 22/12/14 22:17, Alan Cudmore wrote: > >> >> Why was the Linux API chosen over FreeBSD? Wouldn't we want to keep going >> down the *BSD path to provide drivers and libraries? >> > > We also looked at the FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD I2C stuff, but the Linux > I2C API appeared to be the best and most widely used. > > > -- > Sebastian Huber, embedded brains GmbH > > Address : Dornierstr. 4, D-82178 Puchheim, Germany > Phone : +49 89 189 47 41-16 > Fax : +49 89 189 47 41-09 > E-Mail : sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de > PGP : Public key available on request. > > Diese Nachricht ist keine geschäftliche Mitteilung im Sinne des EHUG. > >
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel