On 3/6/2014 1:43 PM, Gedare Bloom wrote: > Joel, > Around line 547 of the patch it appears to be adding an unconditional > define in confdefs.h for > +#define CONFIGURE_CONFDEFS_DEBUG > > Please justify or remove. Otherwise, the patch looks good to me. Bad one on my part. > Do you have any idea what the effect of this patch is on the code, > data, and workspace size? No. But a quick check shows 36896 code, 1040 data and 3234 BSS for minimum.exe built at -O2 with POSIX disabled. I had no special build options.
So nothing noticeable. > Gedare > > > > On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Joel Sherrill <joel.sherr...@oarcorp.com> > wrote: >> Hi >> >> I think all comments have been addressed. Tests run in uniprocessor >> configuration with POSIX enabled and disabled. >> >> confdefs.h debug updated >> >> -- >> Joel Sherrill, Ph.D. Director of Research & Development >> joel.sherr...@oarcorp.com On-Line Applications Research >> Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS Huntsville AL 35805 >> Support Available (256) 722-9985 >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> rtems-devel mailing list >> rtems-devel@rtems.org >> http://www.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/rtems-devel >> -- Joel Sherrill, Ph.D. Director of Research & Development joel.sherr...@oarcorp.com On-Line Applications Research Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS Huntsville AL 35805 Support Available (256) 722-9985 _______________________________________________ rtems-devel mailing list rtems-devel@rtems.org http://www.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/rtems-devel
