Re: [PATCH] Improve file header comment in generated files

On 21/01/2021 01:00, Joel Sherrill wrote: rtems.org/bugs.html is now in place. Chris has reviewed. Thanks, I will change the URL from https://www.rtems.org/support/bugs.html to https://www.rtems.org/bugs.html in the header: _AUTOMATICALLY_GENERATED_WARNING = [

Re: [PATCH] Improve file header comment in generated files

rtems.org/bugs.html is now in place. Chris has reviewed. If there is another URL referenced by existing code, let me know so we can address that. --joel On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 5:47 PM Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 5:33 PM Chris Johns wrote: > >> On 21/1/21 10:23 am,

Re: [PATCH] Improve file header comment in generated files

On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 5:33 PM Chris Johns wrote: > On 21/1/21 10:23 am, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 5:01 PM Chris Johns > > wrote: > > > > On 19/1/21 5:01 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: > > > diff --git a/c-user/config/bdbuf.rst

Re: [PATCH] Improve file header comment in generated files

On 21/1/21 10:23 am, Joel Sherrill wrote: > On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 5:01 PM Chris Johns > wrote: > > On 19/1/21 5:01 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: > > diff --git a/c-user/config/bdbuf.rst b/c-user/config/bdbuf.rst > > index 06399e0..5a3360f 100644 > > ---

Re: gdb on CentOS was Re: Fwd: [rtems-source-builder commit] 6/7: Update unstable RTEMS 6/7 tool chain

On Wed, Jan 20, 2021, 5:04 PM Chris Johns wrote: > On 21/1/21 3:40 am, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 17, 2021 at 11:20 PM Sebastian Huber > > sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de>> > > wrote: > > > > On 17/01/2021 21:23, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > > > Does this fix the build

Re: [PATCH] Improve file header comment in generated files

On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 5:01 PM Chris Johns wrote: > On 19/1/21 5:01 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: > > diff --git a/c-user/config/bdbuf.rst b/c-user/config/bdbuf.rst > > index 06399e0..5a3360f 100644 > > --- a/c-user/config/bdbuf.rst > > +++ b/c-user/config/bdbuf.rst > > @@ -8,11 +8,15 @@ > > ..

Re: Add "CONSTRAINTS" section do directive documentation?

On 21/1/21 6:28 am, Peter Dufault wrote: > Totally agree. > >> On Jan 20, 2021, at 10:58 , Gedare Bloom wrote: >> >> I think this seems reasonable. >> >> On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 3:48 AM Sebastian Huber >> wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I would like to add a "CONSTRAINTS" section to the directive >>

Re: gdb on CentOS was Re: Fwd: [rtems-source-builder commit] 6/7: Update unstable RTEMS 6/7 tool chain

On 21/1/21 3:40 am, Joel Sherrill wrote: > On Sun, Jan 17, 2021 at 11:20 PM Sebastian Huber > > > wrote: > > On 17/01/2021 21:23, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > Does this fix the build failure for what looks to be all 6 toolchains > > over the

Re: [PATCH] Improve file header comment in generated files

On 19/1/21 5:01 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: > diff --git a/c-user/config/bdbuf.rst b/c-user/config/bdbuf.rst > index 06399e0..5a3360f 100644 > --- a/c-user/config/bdbuf.rst > +++ b/c-user/config/bdbuf.rst > @@ -8,11 +8,15 @@ > .. worded better please post a report or patch to an RTEMS mailing list

Re: Add "CONSTRAINTS" section do directive documentation?

Totally agree. > On Jan 20, 2021, at 10:58 , Gedare Bloom wrote: > > I think this seems reasonable. > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 3:48 AM Sebastian Huber > wrote: > Hello, > > I would like to add a "CONSTRAINTS" section to the directive > documentation (after or before the NOTES). For example

Re: Doubt in importance of SCHEDULER_PRIORITY_APPEND

On 20/01/2021 17:46, Joel Sherrill wrote: On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 1:50 AM Richi Dubey > wrote: Appending an item to its priority group means adding the item to the end of the priority queue of items with the same priority, but when/why do we do this?

Re: Doubt in importance of SCHEDULER_PRIORITY_APPEND

On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 1:50 AM Richi Dubey wrote: > Appending an item to its priority group means adding the item to the end > of the priority queue of items with the same priority, but when/why do we > do this? Do all classic tasks have their SCHEDULER_PRIORITY_APPEND_FLAG set > to 1? > There

gdb on CentOS was Re: Fwd: [rtems-source-builder commit] 6/7: Update unstable RTEMS 6/7 tool chain

On Sun, Jan 17, 2021 at 11:20 PM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > On 17/01/2021 21:23, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > Does this fix the build failure for what looks to be all 6 toolchains > > over the weekend? > > No, there seems to be a CentOS 7.9 specific issue with

Re: Add "CONSTRAINTS" section do directive documentation?

I think this seems reasonable. On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 3:48 AM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > Hello, > > I would like to add a "CONSTRAINTS" section to the directive > documentation (after or before the NOTES). For example in the NOTES of > rtems_timer_create() >

Re: [PATCH] mrsp: Change error status for a nested seize

seems good On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 2:36 AM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > Return STATUS_DEADLOCK (RTEMS_INCORRECT_STATE) to indicate a nested > seize since this is a kind of deadlock. This status code is also used > for other deadlocks. > > Update #4217. > --- >

Add "CONSTRAINTS" section do directive documentation?

Hello, I would like to add a "CONSTRAINTS" section to the directive documentation (after or before the NOTES). For example in the NOTES of rtems_timer_create() https://docs.rtems.org/branches/master/c-user/timer/directives.html#rtems-timer-create we have "This directive may cause the

[PATCH] mrsp: Change error status for a nested seize

Return STATUS_DEADLOCK (RTEMS_INCORRECT_STATE) to indicate a nested seize since this is a kind of deadlock. This status code is also used for other deadlocks. Update #4217. --- cpukit/include/rtems/score/mrspimpl.h | 30 +-- testsuites/smptests/smpmrsp01/init.c | 2 +-

[patch libBSD] dev/ofw: Use RTEMS OFW FDT implementation

This commit modifies the OFW interface to the RTEMS FDT implementation instead of the default FreeBSD. --- freebsd/sys/dev/ofw/openfirm.c| 2 ++ freebsd/sys/dev/ofw/openfirm.h| 9 .../machine/rtems-bsd-kernel-namespace.h | 22 --- 3

Re: [PATCH] Implement FreeBSD helper structures

Hello Sebastian, On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 10:47 AM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > Hello Niteesh, > > On 19/01/2021 17:20, G S Niteesh Babu wrote: > > The following structures and functions have been implemented to > > make porting of driver from FreeBSD easier. >

Re: [PATCH] Implement FreeBSD helper structures

Hello Gedare, On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 4:32 AM Gedare Bloom wrote: > Does this have a ticket? > It doesn't have a specific ticket for itself, but the rationale behind this patch is to support ticket #3782 . > I may have missed some email about this idea. It