[PATCH 2/2] Beagle i2c: Update Beaglebone i2c driver code

This patch modify the i2c code for Beaglebone Black based on PV works: - bbb-i2c.c: Modify the interrupt handler, transfer funciton, read function, am335x_i2c_busbusy function etc. Add flush_fifo function - include/i2c.h: Modify some macros, such as BBB_I2C_IRQ_ERROR Now the i2c is working on Bea

[PATCH 1/2] beagle i2c: Add beaglebone i2c driver code

From: Punit Vara This patch add the I2C driver code for Beaglebone Black: - Add beagle/i2c/bbb-i2c.c i2c driver code - Modify include/i2c.h - Modify beagle/Makefile.am But i2c can not work currently --- c/src/lib/libbsp/arm/beagle/Makefile.am | 4 +- c/src/lib/libbsp/arm/beagle/i2c/bbb-i2c

RE: suggested changes and bug fixes for RTEMS

Hi Joel, What I would like to know is when will the change shows up when someone typed git clone git://git.rtems.org/rtems.git on the command line? Is it only showing up after 4.12 official release or after a week when someone performs configuration management (reviewed and merged to latest)

Re: BSP Build Report

On 13/5/17 1:14 am, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > I sent my patch updating the tools to gcc 7.1 and binutils 2.28. > Unfortunately, 49 BSPs which used to build all tests with old networking > enabled now fail to completely even with networking off. Basically 48 > BSPs have one or more test which fails

Re: [PATCH] tests: CONFIGURE_DISABLE_SMP_CONFIGURATION

On 12/5/17 8:24 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: > Mark tests that require review due to > CONFIGURE_DISABLE_SMP_CONFIGURATION. If a test fails it fails. I feel the test results need to correctly express the failures and we should not masks them in the way. I do not agree with changes that suppress a fa

RE: suggested changes and bug fixes for RTEMS

On May 12, 2017 1:51 PM, "Pham, Phong" wrote: Hi Gedare, " your name and real email address" I updated the respective tickets with patches for correct name & email addr. "... will be merged into rtems and be immediately available via git-pull..." I hope I would receive an email on a given tick

RE: suggested changes and bug fixes for RTEMS

Hi Gedare, " your name and real email address" I updated the respective tickets with patches for correct name & email addr. "... will be merged into rtems and be immediately available via git-pull..." I hope I would receive an email on a given ticket saying the code has been merged for that tic

Re: [PATCH 00/32] LEON

Hi Joel, I have run the rtems-testsuite different configurations including SMP and non-smp with/without driver manager enabled. There are a couple 5-10 failures since before, where 5 stems from known problem related to our toolchain config. We use a our own scripted test environment so I haven

Re: Patch for ticket #2990

Hi Linda, Thanks for your contribution. Your patch got merged, but there still appears to be a problem with the patch it applies to fix the original build error: https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/2990 On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 6:38 AM, Linda Huxley wrote: > Here is the patch requested by Chris. (Hop

Re: suggested changes and bug fixes for RTEMS

Thank you Phong, As noted by Sebastian on Trac, please use your name and real email address in your git configuration. We need this to track the authorship of code. After passing review etc, the patches will be merged into rtems and be immediately available via git-pull. We are approaching the 4.

BSP Build Report

Hi I sent my patch updating the tools to gcc 7.1 and binutils 2.28. Unfortunately, 49 BSPs which used to build all tests with old networking enabled now fail to completely even with networking off. Basically 48 BSPs have one or more test which fails to link due to not fitting in memory. Moxie has

[PATCH] Update tools to gcc 7.1.0 and binutils 2.28

--- rtems/config/4.12/rtems-default.bset | 4 +- rtems/config/tools/rtems-binutils-2.28-1.cfg | 22 .../rtems-gcc-7.1.0-newlib-2.5.0.20170323-1.cfg| 64 ++ 3 files changed, 88 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) create mode 100644 rtems/config/tools

[PATCH] tests: CONFIGURE_DISABLE_SMP_CONFIGURATION

Mark tests that require review due to CONFIGURE_DISABLE_SMP_CONFIGURATION. Update #3020. --- testsuites/libtests/block08/system.h | 1 + testsuites/libtests/cpuuse/system.h| 1 + testsuites/libtests/rtmonuse/system.h | 1 + testsuites/libtests/termios05/init.c | 1 + test

Re: [PATCH] confdefs.h: Add SMP enabled field to configuration

On 12/05/17 11:20, Sebastian Huber wrote: On 12/05/17 11:15, Joel Sherrill wrote: On May 12, 2017 3:44 AM, "Sebastian Huber" > wrote: On 12/05/17 10:39, Chris Johns wrote: On 12/05/2017 18:11, Sebastian Huber wrote: Do n

Re: [PATCH] confdefs.h: Add SMP enabled field to configuration

On 12/05/17 11:15, Joel Sherrill wrote: On May 12, 2017 3:44 AM, "Sebastian Huber" > wrote: On 12/05/17 10:39, Chris Johns wrote: On 12/05/2017 18:11, Sebastian Huber wrote: Do not use the processor count to determine if SM

Re: GCC 7.1 Released

On May 12, 2017 3:42 AM, "Chris Johns" wrote: On 12/05/2017 18:39, Sebastian Huber wrote: > On 12/05/17 10:35, Chris Johns wrote: > >> On 12/05/2017 15:56, Sebastian Huber wrote: >> >>> On 11/05/17 17:29, Joel Sherrill wrote: >>> >> I talked to Joel late his time yesterday and he is reporting in

Re: [PATCH] confdefs.h: Add SMP enabled field to configuration

On May 12, 2017 3:44 AM, "Sebastian Huber" < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: On 12/05/17 10:39, Chris Johns wrote: > On 12/05/2017 18:11, Sebastian Huber wrote: > >> Do not use the processor count to determine if SMP is enabled. Instead >> use a dedicated configuration option. Enable

Re: [PATCH] confdefs.h: Add SMP enabled field to configuration

On 12/05/17 10:39, Chris Johns wrote: On 12/05/2017 18:11, Sebastian Huber wrote: Do not use the processor count to determine if SMP is enabled. Instead use a dedicated configuration option. Enable SMP by default in SMP configurations. Add CONFIGURE_DISABLE_SMP_CONFIGURATION to all test which

Re: GCC 7.1 Released

On 12/05/2017 18:39, Sebastian Huber wrote: On 12/05/17 10:35, Chris Johns wrote: On 12/05/2017 15:56, Sebastian Huber wrote: On 11/05/17 17:29, Joel Sherrill wrote: I talked to Joel late his time yesterday and he is reporting increased code size and as a result some tests are not fitting into

Re: [PATCH] confdefs.h: Add SMP enabled field to configuration

On 12/05/2017 18:11, Sebastian Huber wrote: Do not use the processor count to determine if SMP is enabled. Instead use a dedicated configuration option. Enable SMP by default in SMP configurations. Add CONFIGURE_DISABLE_SMP_CONFIGURATION to all test which would fail otherwise. I think addin

Re: GCC 7.1 Released

On 12/05/17 10:35, Chris Johns wrote: On 12/05/2017 15:56, Sebastian Huber wrote: On 11/05/17 17:29, Joel Sherrill wrote: Ok to On May 11, 2017 5:09 AM, "Sebastian Huber" mailto:sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de>> wrote: Hello, if someone wants to use GCC 7.1 for RTEMS 4.12, then th

Re: GCC 7.1 Released

On 12/05/2017 15:56, Sebastian Huber wrote: On 11/05/17 17:29, Joel Sherrill wrote: Ok to On May 11, 2017 5:09 AM, "Sebastian Huber" mailto:sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de>> wrote: Hello, if someone wants to use GCC 7.1 for RTEMS 4.12, then the RSB should be updated accordingly

[PATCH] confdefs.h: Add SMP enabled field to configuration

Do not use the processor count to determine if SMP is enabled. Instead use a dedicated configuration option. Enable SMP by default in SMP configurations. Add CONFIGURE_DISABLE_SMP_CONFIGURATION to all test which would fail otherwise. Update #3001. --- cpukit/sapi/include/confdefs.h |