Why the minimal presence of RP2040 on Platformio?

The RP2040 was launched 3 years ago, has larger following and many off the shelf boards, but is almost no show on platformio. I could find support for only two boards, no support for the SDK API even though wizio had one long time ago, and adoption of the earlephilhower popular core by platformio seems to get push back.

Am I missing something? And if not, what is the slow adoption? It’s a major gap in Platformio’s offering.

Please enlighten me.

1 Like

Тhe problem is not PlatformIO


What is the problem then? Raspberry corp? Legal? Technical? Something else?

Raspberry corp & Technical

  • Raspberry corp: The last I heard from them was: We don’t have a Python specialist to support PlatformIO :slight_smile:
  • Technical: poorly structured SDK, poor documentation, bad support…

You witnessed the discussions we had in the RPI forum

I deleted the port because of bad attitude from raspberry corp and board manufacturers
and i still released this one (unfinished)

I gave the idea for Pico WiFi ( in its current form and implementation )
they ( Raspberry corp ) didn’t even say: Thank you

1 Like

Wizio, I used your previous baremetal in the past and it works very well for me, but it was not incorporated with platformio for some reason.

Looking at the new one you linked, it seems to require installation of tools outside of platformio. This takes away the main advantage of platformio, the ability to take a single portable project file platform.ini and setup automatically the tools and environments necessary to build and debug.

I would like to hear from the platfromio staff, what are your plans regarding RP2040? Supporting only two boards, three years after that the popular RP2040 was launched, is not impressive, and between @maxgerhardt and @wizio, there seems to be significant contributions from the community.

1 Like

I personally didn’t push for it to be included because the SDK has flaws and the support from RPI was non-existent…
I was just writing it myself, without any support ( except few friends )

1 Like

I used your old baremetal framework for a project and it worked well for me, including for the RP2040 PIO state machine programming, and debugging. It was clean, non bloated, and I could refer directly to the API documentation of the RP2040 SDK. I wish Platformio would provide something like that.

1 Like

It is a long story, you can read it at Arduino-Pico (Earlephilhower) support, PicoProbe Debugging by maxgerhardt · Pull Request #36 · platformio/platform-raspberrypi · GitHub

Actually, the answer is here

Also, the PlatformIO Labs’ official comment

Nevertheless, we would be thankful if you contact RPi Trading directly via “Get in touch” form Contact us - Raspberry Pi
The more people request PlatformIO support, the faster RPi’s managers will make arrangements.

1 Like

Thanks @ivankravets. I am still trying to sort out the details. What exactly should we ask from Raspberry ? Do you want them to perform and own the integration with platformio? Do you want them to resolve technical roadblocks that hold back the community with doing this integration? Please clarify so we will know what to ask.

Also, reading your post below suggests that you are seeking payment from Raspberry. Is it so? Do chip vendors need to pay platformio to have their products supported?

EDIT, Just found the link below. It looks like

  1. The Raspberry corp doesn’t care if RP2040 is supported or not by platformio.
  2. Platformio users want RP2040 support and are willing to contribute time to make it happen.
  3. Platformio want to get paid to allow this integration.

Am I missing something?

This is the main reason.


Thanks Ivan.

Raspberry not caring is a given but your users care and are willing to contribute time and effort.

The question now is what platformio does with it.

I never realized that platformio is a ‘pay to play’ eco system and only products of paying vendors are included. That’s new to me.


@wizio, it’s common for large companies not to give credit for ideas. For legal and other reasons. If you believe that your idea triggered that product, you should be proud.


if Ivan didn’t have an Idea for PlatformIO…
The rest is a matter of implementation

The story was something like that:
“A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away…”
I released the PlatformIO Port a month after the presentation
I wrote and experimented with examples and an idea came to me about WiFi module, I found the chip, SDK, examples … but I couldn’t find a real chip for experiments
The idea was that this chip was used in industrial quantities, it was tested many times, it was cheap, it was “easy” to control
I explained to them all aspects, including that their CORP is friends with the other CORP(WiFi)
the answer was (haughty): This is nonsense, We are currently dealing with more more “surprises”
a year after the first board, I happened to see the implementation of the second one
I tell them: at least say: Thank you…

  • for what? these are trivial solutions, then, we worked on this board… ( they still remember what I told them )

and so on

and how you expect this corporation to use PlatformIO ( they don’t even have an Arduino ) for the benefit of all fans and customers

Georgi, I understand the frustration but to give you credit for your idea would require them to get approval from management and legal and most likely they would be kicked tem from all the stairs because there is no benefit to the company in admitting, but just a potential legal liability. This is how the business world work, but you your idea is appreciated by me and others.

As for platformio, limiting RP2040 support to two boards and the unpopular mbed RTOS hurts IMO its message of a unified embedded development environment.

1 Like

You didn’t understand me, it wasn’t about ideas, credits, money … etc
In today’s world, if you don’t present your product properly … it is doomed to fail

Do you know the story of Espressif
If you think about it, you will answer why there is no esp-killer yet

@wizio, I am not familiar with the history of Espressif you mentioned. Can you explain?

were like any corp. - hidden, covered, paid…
one idea, and … still no ESP “killer”

never mind … cheers !!!

In my opinion, ESP32 didn’t get much adoption in the industry because it’s not originated and owned by the free world. There is a natural hesitancy in using networking and IOT technology that is under the control of the CCP.

As for RPI, I think they are relatively small education/maker oriented company and not a general purpose silicon vendor like let’s say ST and this explains for example the style and quality of their documentation.

1 Like