Podling Nuttx Report Reminder - July 2020

2020-06-24 Thread jmclean
Dear podling, This email was sent by an automated system on behalf of the Apache Incubator PMC. It is an initial reminder to give you plenty of time to prepare your quarterly board report. The board meeting is scheduled for Wed, 15 July 2020. The report for your podling will form a part of the

Re: [VOTE] Apache NuttX 9.1.0 (incubating) RC0 release

2020-06-24 Thread Brennan Ashton
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020, 10:56 AM Gregory Nutt wrote > > My concern is that if we sweep things under the carpet now and continue > with the 9.1 eyes shut as if there is nothing wrong, we will continue to > degrade the OS footprint over time. It requires aggressive action to > control the binary

RE: [VOTE] Apache NuttX 9.1.0 (incubating) RC0 release

2020-06-24 Thread David Sidrane
I am not sure if this was in the last release, but there is a secondary level change to date that the CONFIG_TIME_EXTENDED was removed and made permanently enabled. Things like CONFIG_TIME_EXTENDED were there to scale down for resource constrained configurations. I for one would like to preserve

Re: [VOTE] Apache NuttX 9.1.0 (incubating) RC0 release

2020-06-24 Thread Gregory Nutt
On 6/24/2020 9:20 AM, Alan Carvalho de Assis wrote: Hi Greg, On 6/24/20, Gregory Nutt wrote: Changing the default is not the problem. The problem is when the default configuration value is changed, the all configurations effected by that change in the default setting should be updated so

Re: [VOTE] Apache NuttX 9.1.0 (incubating) RC0 release

2020-06-24 Thread Gregory Nutt
Yes, it should be nice to have bloaty integrated on CI system to ring an alarm when something like this happen. If it works as advertised, then this would be a good idea.  Some gradual code growth is natural natural due to the nature of the NuttX roadmap -- to be a complete, small POSIX OS

Re: [VOTE] Apache NuttX 9.1.0 (incubating) RC0 release

2020-06-24 Thread Alan Carvalho de Assis
Hi Greg, On 6/24/20, Gregory Nutt wrote: > > Changing the default is not the problem. The problem is when the > default configuration value is changed, the all configurations effected > by that change in the default setting should be updated so that they are > not effected. That is, so the net

Re: [VOTE] Apache NuttX 9.1.0 (incubating) RC0 release

2020-06-24 Thread Alan Carvalho de Assis
Hi David, Thank you for this suggestion! Yes, it should be nice to have bloaty integrated on CI system to ring an alarm when something like this happen. BR, Alan On 6/24/20, David Sidrane wrote: > This is a cool tool. > > https://github.com/google/bloaty > > Here is a set of ways to use it.

Re: [VOTE] Apache NuttX 9.1.0 (incubating) RC0 release

2020-06-24 Thread Gregory Nutt
Started looking and there are some changes in the diff in the generated config.h as can be seen here One change is the date command is no longer disabled by default. This accounts for 2304 bytes, leaving only 800 byte change. I'm not sure if changing the default was expected, but I dont think

RE: [VOTE] Apache NuttX 9.1.0 (incubating) RC0 release

2020-06-24 Thread David Sidrane
This is a cool tool. https://github.com/google/bloaty Here is a set of ways to use it. https://github.com/PX4/Firmware/blob/4e7dedede79872401f50c733bd74e5ddf1fa41f1/cmake/bloaty.cmake (please ignore the cmake...) This is the one that can be used to see the deltas, in our case from mater to the

bug report

2020-06-24 Thread kwonsk
Hi, During the test, I've got a system crash (hardfault) when running os_test. After debugging with jtag+gdb, I found that crash occurred at line 283 of mm_realloc() (mm_realloc.c). Hardfault cause was "accessing invalid memory area". This is because realloc logic uses new size (not the