You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@nuttx.apache.org by Nathan Hartman <ha...@gmail.com> on 2022/06/20 02:30:27 UTC
Fwd: [MENTORS] Podling reports for July
Our podling report is due by end of day on 6 July 2022.
I have staged an initial draft here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NUTTX/2022+-+07+-+July
Of course we are waiting for voting to complete on the latest NuttX
release. Hopefully that will happen well before July 6th, in which
case the report will need to be updated accordingly -- and which will
be great news!
Just for completeness, once the report is finalized, it needs to be copied to:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INCUBATOR/July2022
Cheers,
Nathan
Re: Apps: SQLite/Python on Nuttx
Posted by Tomek CEDRO <to...@cedro.info>.
On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 7:36 PM wrote:
> Not using the existing POSIX infrastructure for uPython, and instead try
> to emulate any bare metal uPython, looks wired to me.
Too early to talk about, devil is in the details, it will be full
POSIX, no emulation, and I want full portability between bare metal
and NuttX port :-) Probably "just" a port to NuttX as there is port to
Unix.. but we will have hardware access on NuttX. We will see how much
of that "just" and "simple" is possible in reality :-)
--
CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info
Re: Apps: SQLite/Python on Nuttx
Posted by mi...@mdc-service.de.
to my understanding, uPython on Nuttx will be very similar to Python on
Linux. The POSIX concept of both is (near) identical. On the other side,
uPython on bare metal will be very different from both POSIX systems
Nuttx and Linux. The example of the BMP180 sensor will most likely work
on Nuttx and Linux uPython, but not on bare metal.
I would prefer a compatibility to Linux/Python then to any bare metal.
Both architectures are very close.
Not using the existing POSIX infrastructure for uPython, and instead try
to emulate any bare metal uPython, looks wired to me.
I guess, you understand, that an operating system like Nuttx, shield and
prevent hardware specific parts from user applications. The user land
application uPython, on Nuttx, have to use the POSIX interface to use
the hardware interface. You should also understand, that resources like
the SPI bus, will be used by several applications, not only uPython. As
such, only Nuttx can handle concurrent access to these.
On bare metal, all resources are yours. But not so in Linux, and not in
Nuttx.
Am 2022-06-20 18:38, schrieb Tomek CEDRO:
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 6:26 PM Tomek CEDRO wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 5:30 PM wrote:
>> > I dont think there is much to do with the drivers:
>> > Nuttx have already many drivers written in C, and from uPython, you just
>> > can open(), read(), write(), close() the character drivers. For example,
>> > if you like to read a pressure sensor what is already supported (BMP180
>> > for example, a pressure sensor connected by I2C), all the hardware stuff
>> > is done already in C. uPython only needs to open the BMP180, and ready.
>> >
>> > This is the big different of (u)Python on Nuttx compared with uPython on
>> > bare metal. The uPython on bare metal implementation must implement
>> > every hardware/sensor by itself. uPython on Nuttx can reuse all existing
>> > sensors, actors, and so on.
>> (..)
>>
>> Using existing NuttX drivers should be possible in ported MP (i.e.
>> filesystem device read/write). But also what worked on bare MP should
>> work on MP+NuttX. I would not take the path of using existing NuttX
>> drivers to implement underlying drivers for MicroPython because that
>> would not be the generic way.
>
> Sorry, local distraction and it that part sounds contrary what I wrote
> before.
>
> What I mean is I want any code work on generic set of drivers. So code
> would be fully portable between bare-metal MicroPython and MicroPython
> on NuttX both ways.
>
> That would be probably implemented using NuttX as build target for
> MicroPython just as current Unix build target. Generic drivers will be
> "glue" and will use underlying character/block devices implemented by
> NuttX so we are independent from underlying hardware.
>
> Using existing target drivers of MicroPython on NuttX would imply
> problems with NuttX drivers and vice-versa. Thus "the glue drivers and
> build target concept".
>
> Sure existing BMP180 driver of NuttX could be used on MP on NuttX. But
> that would not work the other way - you would not run that code on
> bare metal MicroPython. If no portability is required this is fine and
> may be even more efficient. However, I would like to have a solution
> that would work both ways in the first place and that would be my
> ultimate goal :-)
Re: Apps: SQLite/Python on Nuttx
Posted by Tomek CEDRO <to...@cedro.info>.
On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 6:26 PM Tomek CEDRO wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 5:30 PM wrote:
> > I dont think there is much to do with the drivers:
> > Nuttx have already many drivers written in C, and from uPython, you just
> > can open(), read(), write(), close() the character drivers. For example,
> > if you like to read a pressure sensor what is already supported (BMP180
> > for example, a pressure sensor connected by I2C), all the hardware stuff
> > is done already in C. uPython only needs to open the BMP180, and ready.
> >
> > This is the big different of (u)Python on Nuttx compared with uPython on
> > bare metal. The uPython on bare metal implementation must implement
> > every hardware/sensor by itself. uPython on Nuttx can reuse all existing
> > sensors, actors, and so on.
> (..)
>
> Using existing NuttX drivers should be possible in ported MP (i.e.
> filesystem device read/write). But also what worked on bare MP should
> work on MP+NuttX. I would not take the path of using existing NuttX
> drivers to implement underlying drivers for MicroPython because that
> would not be the generic way.
Sorry, local distraction and it that part sounds contrary what I wrote before.
What I mean is I want any code work on generic set of drivers. So code
would be fully portable between bare-metal MicroPython and MicroPython
on NuttX both ways.
That would be probably implemented using NuttX as build target for
MicroPython just as current Unix build target. Generic drivers will be
"glue" and will use underlying character/block devices implemented by
NuttX so we are independent from underlying hardware.
Using existing target drivers of MicroPython on NuttX would imply
problems with NuttX drivers and vice-versa. Thus "the glue drivers and
build target concept".
Sure existing BMP180 driver of NuttX could be used on MP on NuttX. But
that would not work the other way - you would not run that code on
bare metal MicroPython. If no portability is required this is fine and
may be even more efficient. However, I would like to have a solution
that would work both ways in the first place and that would be my
ultimate goal :-)
--
CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info
Re: Apps: SQLite/Python on Nuttx
Posted by Tomek CEDRO <to...@cedro.info>.
On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 5:30 PM wrote:
> great to see your success on uPython for Nuttx. For your "I will have to
> see how much work with peripheral drivers will be out there in bare
> metal MP to NuttX,", I dont think there is much to do with the drivers:
> Nuttx have already many drivers written in C, and from uPython, you just
> can open(), read(), write(), close() the character drivers. For example,
> if you like to read a pressure sensor what is already supported (BMP180
> for example, a pressure sensor connected by I2C), all the hardware stuff
> is done already in C. uPython only needs to open the BMP180, and ready.
>
> This is the big different of (u)Python on Nuttx compared with uPython on
> bare metal. The uPython on bare metal implementation must implement
> every hardware/sensor by itself. uPython on Nuttx can reuse all existing
> sensors, actors, and so on.
>
> Good luck!
Thank you but no success yet only an idea.. the whole work is still ahead :-)
I was thinking about glue between peripheral drivers in MP and
existing driver infrastructure in NuttX.. probably a glue will have to
be created in MP in order to use existing drivers in NuttX. That would
be probably most generic and future proof way. Probably NuttX will
have to become a dedicated target for MP build.
We probably do not want to use existing MicroPython hardware drivers
for a specific target (i.e. writing peripheral registers) as this
would interfere with existing drivers in NuttX (i.e. /dev/gpio). That
would allow running MP just as another application while other
applications will work in the background. Maybe a "hard" switch from
NuttX to MP would be necessary in the first step.
I would like MP to be just another application to run on NuttX.
Also as there are other drivers available outside MP repository I
would prefer to stick only to the bare-metal set of drivers (i.e.
GPIO, SPI, I2C) that are provided by a given MP target (i.e.
ESP32/-C3) so we could just glue them to NuttX target and work on a
generic MP build inside NuttX.
Using existing NuttX drivers should be possible in ported MP (i.e.
filesystem device read/write). But also what worked on bare MP should
work on MP+NuttX. I would not take the path of using existing NuttX
drivers to implement underlying drivers for MicroPython because that
would not be the generic way.
Reality will verify all concepts :-)
--
CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info
Re: Apps: SQLite/Python on Nuttx
Posted by mi...@mdc-service.de.
Hi Tomek,
great to see your success on uPython for Nuttx. For your "I will have to
see how much work with peripheral drivers will be out there in bare
metal MP to NuttX,", I dont think there is much to do with the drivers:
Nuttx have already many drivers written in C, and from uPython, you just
can open(), read(), write(), close() the character drivers. For example,
if you like to read a pressure sensor what is already supported (BMP180
for example, a pressure sensor connected by I2C), all the hardware stuff
is done already in C. uPython only needs to open the BMP180, and ready.
This is the big different of (u)Python on Nuttx compared with uPython on
bare metal. The uPython on bare metal implementation must implement
every hardware/sensor by itself. uPython on Nuttx can reuse all existing
sensors, actors, and so on.
Good luck!
Am 2022-06-20 17:18, schrieb Tomek CEDRO:
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 8:51 AM wrote:
>> (..)
>> About Python: there was in the past a uPython port for Nuttx, but it
>> seems to be abandoned in 2016 or so. Is anybody working on a Python or
>> uPython port to Nuttx?
>
> Hey there Michael :-) I have updated the GitHub status with:
>
> I am finishing some projects based on MicroPython so I got some
> experience with it.
>
> I now need something faster for upcoming projects so I will get into
> NuttX internals in upcoming months.
>
> The best scenario for me is to have MicroPython for rapid prototyping
> and proof-of-concept and then NuttX RTOS as the target efficient
> solution.
>
> Having MP on NuttX would allow invisible switch from MP ptototype to
> RTOS and this is the goal :-)
>
> No specific date on when it will work, I will have to see how much
> work with peripheral drivers will be out there in bare metal MP to
> NuttX, but lets assume 2022H2 :-)
Re: Apps: SQLite/Python on Nuttx
Posted by Tomek CEDRO <to...@cedro.info>.
On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 8:51 AM wrote:
> (..)
> About Python: there was in the past a uPython port for Nuttx, but it
> seems to be abandoned in 2016 or so. Is anybody working on a Python or
> uPython port to Nuttx?
Hey there Michael :-) I have updated the GitHub status with:
I am finishing some projects based on MicroPython so I got some
experience with it.
I now need something faster for upcoming projects so I will get into
NuttX internals in upcoming months.
The best scenario for me is to have MicroPython for rapid prototyping
and proof-of-concept and then NuttX RTOS as the target efficient
solution.
Having MP on NuttX would allow invisible switch from MP ptototype to
RTOS and this is the goal :-)
No specific date on when it will work, I will have to see how much
work with peripheral drivers will be out there in bare metal MP to
NuttX, but lets assume 2022H2 :-)
--
CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info
Re: Apps: SQLite/Python on Nuttx
Posted by mi...@mdc-service.de.
oh, great. uPython may attract many people to Nuttx. Thank you for the
hint.
Am 2022-06-20 16:54, schrieb Simon Filgis:
> Hi Michael,
>
> I'm interested in SQ-Light, but do not have any clue of status.
>
> There is a newer PR for Micropython:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx-apps/pull/840
>
> Best,
>
> Simon
>
> --
> Hard- and Softwaredevelopment Consultant
> Ingenieurbüro-Filgis
> USt-IdNr.: DE305343278
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 8:51 AM <mi...@mdc-service.de> wrote:
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> I read, that SQLite was ported to Nuttx. Alan wrote that in a
>> presentation in 2019
>> (https://nuttx.events/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/AAssis_nx2019.pdf).
>> But
>> I cant find SQLite in the 10.0.3 sources.
>>
>> Could somebody give me a hint, where these port is? Or is there any
>> work
>> in progress, where I could start from? My intended platform would be
>> the
>> ESP32-WROVER with 8MB PSRAM. SQLite is under BSD license, what should
>> be
>> compatible to add it to Nuttx.
>>
>> About Python: there was in the past a uPython port for Nuttx, but it
>> seems to be abandoned in 2016 or so. Is anybody working on a Python or
>> uPython port to Nuttx?
>>
>> Thanks for any hint.
>>
Re: Apps: SQLite/Python on Nuttx
Posted by Simon Filgis <si...@ingenieurbuero-filgis.de>.
Hi Michael,
I'm interested in SQ-Light, but do not have any clue of status.
There is a newer PR for Micropython:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx-apps/pull/840
Best,
Simon
--
Hard- and Softwaredevelopment Consultant
Ingenieurbüro-Filgis
USt-IdNr.: DE305343278
On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 8:51 AM <mi...@mdc-service.de> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I read, that SQLite was ported to Nuttx. Alan wrote that in a
> presentation in 2019
> (https://nuttx.events/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/AAssis_nx2019.pdf). But
> I cant find SQLite in the 10.0.3 sources.
>
> Could somebody give me a hint, where these port is? Or is there any work
> in progress, where I could start from? My intended platform would be the
> ESP32-WROVER with 8MB PSRAM. SQLite is under BSD license, what should be
> compatible to add it to Nuttx.
>
> About Python: there was in the past a uPython port for Nuttx, but it
> seems to be abandoned in 2016 or so. Is anybody working on a Python or
> uPython port to Nuttx?
>
> Thanks for any hint.
>
Apps: SQLite/Python on Nuttx
Posted by mi...@mdc-service.de.
Dear all,
I read, that SQLite was ported to Nuttx. Alan wrote that in a
presentation in 2019
(https://nuttx.events/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/AAssis_nx2019.pdf). But
I cant find SQLite in the 10.0.3 sources.
Could somebody give me a hint, where these port is? Or is there any work
in progress, where I could start from? My intended platform would be the
ESP32-WROVER with 8MB PSRAM. SQLite is under BSD license, what should be
compatible to add it to Nuttx.
About Python: there was in the past a uPython port for Nuttx, but it
seems to be abandoned in 2016 or so. Is anybody working on a Python or
uPython port to Nuttx?
Thanks for any hint.
Re: Fwd: [MENTORS] Podling reports for July
Posted by Nathan Hartman <ha...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 8:23 AM Pavel Pisa <pp...@pikron.com> wrote:
>
> Hello everybody,
>
> the is mirror shift of past to the future by some time-machine
>
> Date of last release:
>
> NuttX-10.2.0 was released on 2022-11-23.
> NuttX-10.3.0-RC4 is currently pending IPMC voting.
Thanks Pavel. This should be fixed now. Good catch!
I have copied the report to the Incubator report. It is located here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INCUBATOR/July2022
Cheers,
Nathan
Re: Fwd: [MENTORS] Podling reports for July
Posted by Pavel Pisa <pp...@pikron.com>.
Hello everybody,
the is mirror shift of past to the future by some time-machine
Date of last release:
NuttX-10.2.0 was released on 2022-11-23.
NuttX-10.3.0-RC4 is currently pending IPMC voting.
Best wishes,
Pavel
On Monday 20 of June 2022 04:30:27 Nathan Hartman wrote:
> Our podling report is due by end of day on 6 July 2022.
>
> I have staged an initial draft here:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NUTTX/2022+-+07+-+July
>
> Of course we are waiting for voting to complete on the latest NuttX
> release. Hopefully that will happen well before July 6th, in which
> case the report will need to be updated accordingly -- and which will
> be great news!
>
> Just for completeness, once the report is finalized, it needs to be copied
> to: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INCUBATOR/July2022
>
> Cheers,
> Nathan