> On 23 Mar 2017, at 18:50, Freddie Chopin <[email protected]> wrote: > > ... However me and Liviu had a discussion about describing RTOS structure > in a generic way and I'm still pretty certain that this is generally > not possible in a generic and agnostic way. In the end it would become > either extremely complex or you'd have to implement some kind of > scripting/code to actually deal with that.
as I already mentioned, my next version of the DRTM library will use a compiled binary JSON, so everything that can be described in a JSON will be perfectly acceptable. are JSONs generic enough? I would say they are. will I make the DRTM library 'absolutely generic and agnostic' from the very beginning? definitely not realistic, I'll first define the data types and memory structures that I need for my µOS++. will this be expandable with more memory types? definitely yes! at the end, the number of ways a list of threads is kept may be large, at the limit each RTOS may invent a different scheme, but the number is still finite. ;-) my assumption is that relatively low and manageable, so it should be easier to add a new definition to an existing framework that is already fully functional, than to redo an implementation completely from scratch. and once you do it, the result should be directly available to all servers that use the DRTM library (OpenOCD, J-Link, QEMU being on my TODO list). regards, Liviu ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ OpenOCD-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openocd-devel
