NuttX realtime OS ported to run on the Neuros OSD 1.x

32 views
Skip to first unread message

Fernando Cassia

unread,
Aug 31, 2011, 2:42:18 AM8/31/11
to neu...@googlegroups.com
I arrive at these news one year late. But, I don't remember seeing
this posted here

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/nuttx/message/480

///////////
NuttX v5.9 for the Neuros OSD 1.0 consumer unit builds,
boots, and runs both `nsh' and `ostest' just fine, using
the CodeSourcery 2010q1-188 EABI toolchain on GNU/Linux.
No changes at all were needed (other than the expected
tweaking of the compiler path in `setenv.sh�). Thanks!
///////////

Perhaps with a lighter kernel the problem of running out of memory
will be gone? :)

I still think a Neuros OSD v1.x with 256MB of RAM and an embedded Java
VM would have been great. :)
[If anyone succeeds in replacing the surface mount ram chips to
replace them with a pair of compatible 256MB SDRAM ones let me know
:)]

FC
PS: WRT the memory issue... Is the document below wrong? I fail to see
if it's the development boards which had 64MB vs 32MB on the
production release, or the other way around...
http://wiki.neurostechnology.com/index.php/OSD_Developer_Board_v1

the statements contradict each other:

"Differences between the Developer Samples and the Production Product
8MB Flash and 32MB RAM _instead of 16MB/64MB as in Production_ "

"Development Board Features

DM320 Multimedia SOC with 200 MHz ARM926, 120 MHz C54x DSP
_64 MB of SDRAM_ "

Vladimir Pantelic

unread,
Aug 31, 2011, 3:39:46 AM8/31/11
to neu...@googlegroups.com
Fernando Cassia wrote:
> I arrive at these news one year late. But, I don't remember seeing
> this posted here
>
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/nuttx/message/480
>
> ///////////
> NuttX v5.9 for the Neuros OSD 1.0 consumer unit builds,
> boots, and runs both `nsh' and `ostest' just fine, using
> the CodeSourcery 2010q1-188 EABI toolchain on GNU/Linux.
> No changes at all were needed (other than the expected
> tweaking of the compiler path in `setenv.sh�). Thanks!
> ///////////
>
> Perhaps with a lighter kernel the problem of running out of memory
> will be gone? :)

yeah, just running a kernel and shell hopefully does not need too
much memory :)

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages