Re: [PATCH 4/6] testsuite: Add expected-fail to psim

On 12/5/20 11:22 pm, Joel Sherrill wrote: On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 4:11 AM Chris Johns > wrote: On 12/5/20 5:15 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: > Hello, > > On 09/05/2020 03:30, Gedare Bloom wrote: > Without these tests being tagged this way the

Re: [PATCH 4/6] testsuite: Add expected-fail to psim

On 13/5/20 12:11 am, Gedare Bloom wrote: On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 3:11 AM Chris Johns wrote: On 12/5/20 5:15 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: Hello, On 09/05/2020 03:30, Gedare Bloom wrote: Without these tests being tagged this way the user would have no idea where the stand after a build and

Re: Memory Protection project interface details (GSoC 2020)

I hate to top post but I'm not sure where to insert this. As a first step, I would ensure that paging catches stack overflow errors. Then move on to an optional capability where threads cannot access the stacks of other threads. POSIX does not say anything about whether that should work or not

Re: Adding fenv support for ARM

Gedare is right but one more piece of information is needed. When newlib is being built, it lays target dependent files on top of generic ones. So the default sys/fenv.h is replaced with something like libc/machine/arm/sys/fenv.h. Make sure that

Re: Memory Protection project interface details (GSoC 2020)

On Tue, 12 May 2020 at 04:57, Gedare Bloom wrote: > > On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 9:59 PM Hesham Almatary > wrote: > > > > Hello Utkarsh, > > > > I'd suggest you don't spend too much efforts on setting up BBB > > hardware if you haven't already. Debugging on QEMU with GDB is way > > easier, and you

Re: Adding fenv support for ARM

Take the first error reported, and show what is being compiled. You've trimmed off too much preceding this to know what is being compiled and how this might be influencing your error. The specific error you're getting is often due to some syntax errors preceding the line shown. On Tue, May 12,

Re: Adding fenv support for ARM

Hello everyone, After adding the files and compiling. I am getting a few errors which I am not able to rectify. If you could take a look and tell how to sort them. link to newlib's git repo: https://github.com/eshandhawan51/newlib-cygwin/tree/add_fenv_support errors : In file included from

Re: Memory Protection project interface details (GSoC 2020)

On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 10:58 AM Utkarsh Rai wrote: > > > > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 9:27 AM Gedare Bloom wrote: >> >> On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 9:59 PM Hesham Almatary >> wrote: >> > >> > Hello Utkarsh, >> > >> > I'd suggest you don't spend too much efforts on setting up BBB >> > hardware if you

Re: Memory Protection project interface details (GSoC 2020)

On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 9:27 AM Gedare Bloom wrote: > On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 9:59 PM Hesham Almatary > wrote: > > > > Hello Utkarsh, > > > > I'd suggest you don't spend too much efforts on setting up BBB > > hardware if you haven't already. Debugging on QEMU with GDB is way > > easier, and you

Re: [PATCH 4/6] testsuite: Add expected-fail to psim

On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 3:11 AM Chris Johns wrote: > > On 12/5/20 5:15 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: > > Hello, > > > > On 09/05/2020 03:30, Gedare Bloom wrote: > > Without these tests being tagged this way the user would have no > > idea where the stand after a build and test run and that

Re: [PATCH 4/6] testsuite: Add expected-fail to psim

On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 4:11 AM Chris Johns wrote: > On 12/5/20 5:15 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: > > Hello, > > > > On 09/05/2020 03:30, Gedare Bloom wrote: > > Without these tests being tagged this way the user would have no > > idea where the stand after a build and test run and that

Re: [PATCH 4/6] testsuite: Add expected-fail to psim

On 12/5/20 5:15 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: Hello, On 09/05/2020 03:30, Gedare Bloom wrote: Without these tests being tagged this way the user would have no idea where the stand after a build and test run and that would mean we would have to make sure a release has no failures. I consider

Re: Small doubt in RTEMS testsuite codes

On 12/05/2020 09:48, Richi Dubey wrote: Heyy Everyone, When I am opening testsuites/sptests/sp01/init.c , I can see the following function definition: rtems_task Init( rtems_task_argument argument ) and when I open testsuites/sptests/sp01/task1.c ( which is compiled(linked) together with

Small doubt in RTEMS testsuite codes

Heyy Everyone, When I am opening testsuites/sptests/sp01/init.c , I can see the following function definition: rtems_task Init( rtems_task_argument argument ) and when I open testsuites/sptests/sp01/task1.c ( which is compiled(linked) together with init.c in the makefile in build of bsp), I

Re: [PATCH 4/6] testsuite: Add expected-fail to psim

Hello, On 09/05/2020 03:30, Gedare Bloom wrote: Without these tests being tagged this way the user would have no idea where the stand after a build and test run and that would mean we would have to make sure a release has no failures. I consider that as not practical or realistic. Maybe we

Re: [PATCH 4/6] testsuite: Add expected-fail to psim

On 06/05/2020 10:41, chr...@rtems.org wrote: From: Chris Johns Updates #2962 --- bsps/powerpc/psim/config/psim-testsuite.tcfg | 22 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+) create mode 100644 bsps/powerpc/psim/config/psim-testsuite.tcfg diff --git