MQX without PE, realistic?

cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

MQX without PE, realistic?

Jump to solution
614 Views
billnd
Contributor IV

I've been struggling to write a PSP/BSP with MQX, without using PE, and to be honest I feel a bit left out in the cold. I guess generating with PE would be relatively straight forward, but without it everything seems to be against me.

For starters wherever you go in the source code you have to pick your way through the PE references, and work out what is relevant and what isn't. This is not as easy as you might imagine, especially as depending on which PSP/BSP you use as your base effects how the software is structured. For example in some supplied bsp_cm.c files _bsp_initialize_hardware() calls a routine called __pe_initialize_hardware(), this is fairly easy to understand. In others, the __pe_initialize_hardware() code is directly in _bsp_initialize_hardware() with no indication that it's PE. This is just once example, I'll let you trawl the packages to find other examples. Even if there was a way to remove all the PE references it would be a start.

So, in more general terms, is it realistic to use MQX in a real world, complex system without PE? I was of the understanding that I wouldn't have to learn all the source code to the whole of MQX to utilise it, but it seem that I not only have to understand entirely the underlying MQX code functionality I also have to navigate round PE too! Please tell me there is a better way! Are there any truly helpful sources of information out there that point the right direction?

Tags (3)
0 Kudos
1 Solution
368 Views
billnd
Contributor IV

Cheers for the reply David.

I've calmed down since my initial unfocused rant, and come up with a more salient, to the point question to try and keep my MQX momentum...

https://community.freescale.com/thread/305054

View solution in original post

0 Kudos
2 Replies
368 Views
DavidS
NXP Employee
NXP Employee

Hi Billnd,

MQX used to be without PE.

With Kinetis devices added the clock configuration, power mode switching, changing devices or pin package, etc...made the code quite complex to maintain.

Decision was made to use PE to manage these aspects of MQX to enable customers ability to use PE to change the default configuration to what they need and/or use the PE code as a starting point and just change it.

All MQX BSP are PE enabled but you don't have to use it.

I agree having PE code with MQX code can make it confusing.  Not certain of the solution but look forward to rest of community responding to help steer the continued development process.

Sorry for confusion it has brought you.

Regards,

David

369 Views
billnd
Contributor IV

Cheers for the reply David.

I've calmed down since my initial unfocused rant, and come up with a more salient, to the point question to try and keep my MQX momentum...

https://community.freescale.com/thread/305054

0 Kudos