zephyr

[ramkumarkoppu]

Hi, I am in the process of evaluating nRF5340 to switch from STM32 device to nRF device as per my ex-colleague recommendation. I started looking at simple blinky example for nRF5340 which uses Zephyr. My question is why nRF driver functions are defined as static inline in .h files, not as normal functions in .c/.cpp files. Making inline functions in header files, is not going to create code duplication in the flash if we have multiple calls to the same driver function? There must be a design decision by either nRF or Zephyr team to make these driver functions are inline in header files? Is there any particular reason for this design choice?

[Øyvind]

Hello, 

Have you read through the Zephyr OS Contribution Guideline?

Kind regards,
Øyvind

[ramkumarkoppu]

Hi, If I want to use both the cores a bare metal systems without a RTOS, do you have a stand alone IPC library code which I can use to have independent applications running on both the cores to communicate? I looked at the Keil pack nRF5340_xxAA which can create project for each processor separately, there is no IPC included in this pack.

[Øyvind]

I'm afraid that is not in focus at the moment. We have introduced the use of Zephyr due to the advanced feature of the nRF5340 and its Cortex M33 architecture. Have a look at this reply from my colleague Amanda. Also, have a look at my colleague Didrik's answer here

Kind regards,
Øyvind