Arduino Joins Zephyr Project
zephyrproject.org
Arduino Joins Zephyr Project
1–10 of 17 posts
Re: Arduino Joins Zephyr Project
#2It makes sense if you consider the devices being made now are faster and more complex than ever.
Multi core SoCs with different archs and memory protection schemes all sharing a bus. This complexity can be wrangled with device tree and Zephyr readily and has good company with other large silicon vendors being contributors.
I for one am looking forward to seeing more contributions and companies joining.
Re: Arduino Joins Zephyr Project
#3I've had the pleasure of using Zephyr OS on an embedded bluetooth project with a few others. We were using NRF52x chips, with a dev board, and Zephyr was one of the least painful parts of the whole thing. Can absolutely recommend Zephyr in general.
Re: Arduino Joins Zephyr Project
#4It makes sense if you consider the devices being made now are faster and more complex than ever. Multi core SoCs with different archs and memory protection schemes all sharing a bus. This complexity can be wrangled with device tree and Zephyr readily and has good company with other large silicon vendors being contributors. I for one am looking forward to seeing more contributions and companies joining.
It's a bit of a tradeoff, really.
The upside is that you no longer have to essentially write an entire OS if you just want to make a light blink, making it way easier to get started with a complicated project. The downside is that all those layers of abstraction make it really hard to figure out what is actually going on, and they can quickly get in the way when you are trying to do something which isn't a 1:1 match to the high-level model used.
Re: Arduino Joins Zephyr Project
#5I've had the pleasure of using Zephyr OS on an embedded bluetooth project with a few others. We were using NRF52x chips, with a dev board, and Zephyr was one of the least painful parts of the whole thing. Can absolutely recommend Zephyr in general.
Zephyr has a lot of good points, but I really wish it didn't use Kconfig. Getting a working config seems to be mostly a matter of copying an already working example. It might be okay for hardware side of things, but it's a really bad at software/feature dependency.
Set https://docs.zephyrproject.org/latest/build/kconfig/tips.htm... and the issue: https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/issues/52575. And don't even get me started on trying anything to group options together.
Re: Arduino Joins Zephyr Project
#6Zephyr is such a great project, I really have enjoyed working with it and the Nordic (NRF5x) is awesome. I think over the next 3-5 years it is really going to get more and more adoption compared to alternatives like freertos or vxworks.
Re: Arduino Joins Zephyr Project
#7I've had the pleasure of using Zephyr OS on an embedded bluetooth project with a few others. We were using NRF52x chips, with a dev board, and Zephyr was one of the least painful parts of the whole thing. Can absolutely recommend Zephyr in general.
Zephyr has a lot of good points, but I really wish it didn't use Kconfig. Getting a working config seems to be mostly a matter of copying an already working example. It might be okay for hardware side of things, but it's a really bad at software/feature dependency. Set https://docs.zephyrproject.org/latest/build/kconfig/tips.htm... and the issue: https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/issues/52575 . And don't e…
Could Zephyr's difficulties be resolved if Kconfig supported an additional operator besides 'select' and 'depends on'? Or perhaps with an overlay capability like bitbake has?
Since Kconfig is used to configure the kernel, why aren't the kernel devs experiencing similar issues with their configurations?
Re: Arduino Joins Zephyr Project
#8is Zephyr a good option in a project that aims to expose a UART device through BLE using an nrf52x chip? At a glance it seems pretty low level, capable and possibly overkill. If not, what's more suitable?
Hopefully that makes sense, I'm new to all of this.
Re: Arduino Joins Zephyr Project
#9is Zephyr a good option in a project that aims to expose a UART device through BLE using an nrf52x chip? At a glance it seems pretty low level, capable and possibly overkill. If not, what's more suitable? Hopefully that makes sense, I'm new to all of this.
Not sure if I understand, but you currently have a device that has UART enabled, and you are trying to communicate with it via BLE? Thus, you want to add a BLE chip, i.e. the nrf52, and then relay the commands from BLE -> UART for the second chip?
Regardless, Zephyr is an RTOS which provides OS functionality like scheduling, interrupt handling, semaphores, etc.
It is most likely overkill for what you are attempting to do. You should instead look at the vendor provided SDK for the nrf52 chip and program it bare metal. The SDK is most likely just libraries/drivers and does not come with an RTOS.
Re: Arduino Joins Zephyr Project
#10is Zephyr a good option in a project that aims to expose a UART device through BLE using an nrf52x chip? At a glance it seems pretty low level, capable and possibly overkill. If not, what's more suitable? Hopefully that makes sense, I'm new to all of this.
Not sure if I understand, but you currently have a device that has UART enabled, and you are trying to communicate with it via BLE? Thus, you want to add a BLE chip, i.e. the nrf52, and then relay the commands from BLE -> UART for the second chip? Regardless, Zephyr is an RTOS which provides OS functionality like scheduling, interrupt handling, semaphores, etc. It is most likely overkill for what you are attempting t…
Yes exactly. This device is a mini exercise bicycle, it has half a dozen buttons and LEDs with a UART enabled chip that orchestrates everything. I'd like to make it controllable via Bluetooth (e.g. on/off, set speed) and have it send stats like current speed, etc.
Would something like circuitpython not be easier to work with?