[Tinyos Core WG] 2.0.2 release plans

[Martin Turon]

I agree that platform #ifdef are really to be avoided.  In TinyOS, they
mostly cropped up due to a lack of a standardized radio PHY driver
abstraction.  Does T2 have such a Radio HIL yet?  The basic interface
is:

interface RadioControl {

	// Frequency & Channel //

	/// Tune the radio frequency to an available preset.
	command result_t setRfChannel(uint8_t freqPreset); 

	/// Get preset back.
	command uint8_t getRfChannel();

	/// Tune the radio to a given frequency manually.
	command result_t setRfFrequency(uint16_t DesiredFreqInMHz);

	/// Get frequency back.
	command uint16_t getRfFrequency();

	// Output Power //

	/// Set the transmit RF power value.
	command result_t setRfPower(uint8_t power);	

	/// Get the present RF power index.
	command uint8_t getRfPower();
}

/**
 * @author   Martin Turon
 * @date     August 28, 2006
 *
 * @version		mturon	2006/8/28		Initial revision
 *
 * $Id: RadioRegister.nc,v 1.1 2006/08/30 01:13:18 mturon Exp $
 */ 
interface RadioRegister<register_size_t> {
  
  /**
   * Transmit <register_size_t> data
   *
   * @return status byte from the radio.  0xff is return of command
failed.
   */
  async command uint8_t write(uint8_t addr, register_size_t data);

  /**
   * Read <register_size_t> data
   *
   * @return <register_size_t> register value
   */
  async command register_size_t read(uint8_t addr);
}


/**
 * Unified radio layer abstraction.
 * @author Martin Turon
 */
configuration XRadioC
{
  provides {
    interface StdControl as Control;
    interface BareSendMsg as Send;
    interface ReceiveMsg as Receive;
    
    interface RadioControl;
	
    // RadioRegister -- access to this interface is not cross-platform!
    interface RadioRegister<uint16_t>;
}

Martin 
__________________________________________________
Martin Turon  |  Crossbow Technology, Inc.

-----Original Message-----
From: tinyos-2.0wg-bounces at Mail.Millennium.Berkeley.EDU
[mailto:tinyos-2.0wg-bounces at Mail.Millennium.Berkeley.EDU] On Behalf Of
Philip Levis
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 10:45 AM
To: Vlado Handziski
Cc: TinyOS Core WG; Razvan Musaloiu-E.; Mike Chieh-Jan Liang; Omprakash
Gnawali
Subject: Re: [Tinyos Core WG] 2.0.2 release plans

Vlado Handziski wrote:
> Do we have any policy again mixing of platform-dependent and 
> platform-independent applications in the top /apps dir? This would be 
> the only platform specific app in the top dir apart from the TOSSIM 
> apps. the /apps/tests is currently a mixed bag.
>
> On another note. One of the things I hated most in TinyOS 1.x were the

> platform #ifdefs. We managed to keep the T2 code pretty clear  until 
> now, but with this app, with Deluge, the CC2420 tests, etc. they are 
> creeping back in. I know it is very convenient, but it makes life much

> harder for the non-core platforms, forcing the maintainers to shadow 
> and patch complete components, etc. In almost all cases, it is much 
> better to factor our the platform dependent code in separate 
> components, with clear interfaces between them and the 
> platform-independent logic.
I think everyone would agree that the fewer #define statements the 
better. At some point, #define statements are needed for things like 
compile-time constant specification, but  I don't think that's
the big deal. Rather, #define specified module and configuration code. 
Generally, #define statements pop up where the abstractions are not 
quite right or where we haven't quite figured out how to structure 
things well; they tend to be at the edge of system design. So let's 
revisit them for 2.1 and see if we can figure out how to reduce them.

Phil
_______________________________________________
Tinyos-2.0wg mailing list
Tinyos-2.0wg at Mail.Millennium.Berkeley.EDU
https://mail.millennium.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tinyos-2.0
wg