On 05/10/2021 03:51, Chris Johns wrote:
On 5/10/21 4:29 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 02/10/2021 01:44, Chris Johns wrote:
The fatal extensions have a well defined order (position in the
table). The user has the full control over the initial extensions table.
Is it backwards compatible when
On 5/10/21 4:29 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 02/10/2021 01:44, Chris Johns wrote:
>>> The fatal extensions have a well defined order (position in the
>>> table). The user has the full control over the initial extensions table.
>> Is it backwards compatible when this new mode is enabled?
>
>
On 4/10/21 3:06 am, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> No BSP was successfully built in the build sweep Friday. All have
> failures like this:
>
> $ ./waf bsp_defaults --rtems-bsps=powerpc/psim
> There is no top-level group with UID '/grp' in the specification
>
> The script fetches the BSP's defaults and
Currently debugger01 is the only user of the test-if-library in libbsd
and it doesn't seem to work as expected. The configure step that detects
libdebugger occurs and succeeds as it should for the zynq a9 qemu BSP,
but debugger01.exe never gets compiled. I found this behavior while
working on
Actually, I was only able to download it on my Linux VM. My FreeBSD 13 VM won't
let me download it from the browser. I was using Firefox for both.
-Original Message-
From: devel On Behalf Of Ryan Long
Sent: Monday, October 4, 2021 2:40 PM
To: devel@rtems.org
Subject: Certificate
Hi,
I'm trying to build qemu, but I keep getting this error message.
RTEMS Source Builder - Set Builder, 6 (3950b1e2d857)
Build Set: devel/qemu
Build Set: devel/autotools-internal.bset
config: devel/autoconf-2.69-1.cfg
package: autoconf-2.69-x86_64-freebsd13.0-1
download:
On 01/10/2021 21:39, Kinsey Moore wrote:
Sebastian,
Could you be more specific about which parts of the
architecture-dependent interface still seem tied to the AArch64 port? I
thought I had made them sufficiently abstract by relying on
architecture-specific functions to manipulate and take
On 04/10/2021 18:11, Joel Sherrill wrote:
Add a stack allocator hook specifically for allocation of IDLE thread stacks.
This allows the user to decide if IDLE thread stacks are statically allocated
or handled by the same custom allocator mechanism as other thread stacks.
Closes #4520.
---
On 02/10/2021 01:44, Chris Johns wrote:
The fatal extensions have a well defined order (position in the
table). The user has the full control over the initial extensions table.
Is it backwards compatible when this new mode is enabled?
When you enable a new feature you get new behaviour. I am
Add a stack allocator hook specifically for allocation of IDLE thread stacks.
This allows the user to decide if IDLE thread stacks are statically allocated
or handled by the same custom allocator mechanism as other thread stacks.
Closes #4520.
---
cpukit/include/rtems/confdefs/percpu.h|
On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 9:13 AM Christian MAUDERER
wrote:
>
> Am 04.10.21 um 15:51 schrieb Joel Sherrill:
> > On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 2:32 AM Christian MAUDERER
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hello Joel,
> >>
> >> Am 03.10.21 um 18:06 schrieb Joel Sherrill:
> >>> Hi
> >>>
> >>> No BSP was successfully built
Am 04.10.21 um 15:51 schrieb Joel Sherrill:
On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 2:32 AM Christian MAUDERER
wrote:
Hello Joel,
Am 03.10.21 um 18:06 schrieb Joel Sherrill:
Hi
No BSP was successfully built in the build sweep Friday. All have
failures like this:
$ ./waf bsp_defaults
On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 2:32 AM Christian MAUDERER
wrote:
>
> Hello Joel,
>
> Am 03.10.21 um 18:06 schrieb Joel Sherrill:
> > Hi
> >
> > No BSP was successfully built in the build sweep Friday. All have
> > failures like this:
> >
> > $ ./waf bsp_defaults --rtems-bsps=powerpc/psim
>
> I just
Hello Joel,
Am 03.10.21 um 18:06 schrieb Joel Sherrill:
Hi
No BSP was successfully built in the build sweep Friday. All have
failures like this:
$ ./waf bsp_defaults --rtems-bsps=powerpc/psim
I just tested this command and everything seems to work fine. I get a
default config for the BSP.
On 02/10/2021 16:10, Joel Sherrill wrote:
.../microblaze_fpga/startup/sim-crtinit.S | 46 +-
FPGA or simulator? The naming seems to contradict it self.
That's likely me building on Joel's first port on GDB, then using the
same file name and modifying it to run on FPGA. Should be renamed
15 matches
Mail list logo