[Tinyos-devel] TEP116 HIL/HAL discussion

[Philip Levis]

On May 15, 2008, at 11:27 AM, Vlado Handziski wrote:

> The additional interfaces in the component are irrelevant for the  
> discussion. Section 5 in the TEP talks about the same interfaces as  
> in ActiveMessageC (btw. there seems to be two sections numbered 5 in  
> the document). What I am saying is that the requirements listed in  
> Section 5 are implementation detail for the HIL and have nothing to  
> do with the HAL level interface. Why do you want to specify from  
> above what the HAL for the radio components should look like and  
> even what names they should have?

To make platform definition simpler.

> The HAL interface can be completely different for each chip/platform  
> and not contain any of the interfaces exported in ActiveMessageC. It  
> can happen that a particular chip/platform HAL is so well aligned  
> with the current HIL that they share those interfaces making the  
> component be both HIL/HAL implementation, but in general this is not  
> a requirement.

But this has come up before. There can be more than one HAL interface.  
TEP 116 states that for a radio chip implementation to be compliant  
with 116, it MUST provide an AM abstraction.

If CC2420ActiveMessageC is not a HAL, and it is also not a HIL, what  
is it?

Phil