On 01.07.22 07:48, Chris Johns wrote:
On 1/7/2022 3:00 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 01.07.22 02:37, Chris Johns wrote:
+void _IO_Gcov_dump_info_base64( IO_Put_char put_char, void *arg );
+
Why just a per char interface? Given this is in the score a buffer plus length
interface would make
On 1/7/2022 3:00 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 01.07.22 02:37, Chris Johns wrote:
>>> +void _IO_Gcov_dump_info_base64( IO_Put_char put_char, void *arg );
>>> +
>> Why just a per char interface? Given this is in the score a buffer plus
>> length
>> interface would make more sense? It would make
On 1/7/2022 3:07 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 01.07.22 03:19, Chris Johns wrote:
>> On 29/6/2022 4:30 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>> This patch set adds support to build the RTEMS libraries with gcov
>>> instrumentation to get code and branch coverage. There are some
>>> improvements
>>>
On 01.07.22 03:19, Chris Johns wrote:
On 29/6/2022 4:30 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
This patch set adds support to build the RTEMS libraries with gcov
instrumentation to get code and branch coverage. There are some improvements
necessary in the build system to support different compiler flags
On 01.07.22 02:37, Chris Johns wrote:
+void _IO_Gcov_dump_info_base64( IO_Put_char put_char, void *arg );
+
Why just a per char interface? Given this is in the score a buffer plus length
interface would make more sense? It would make the interface more efficient.
All the test output uses a
On 01.07.22 02:18, Chris Johns wrote:
On 29/6/2022 4:30 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
The waf build system uses lists for tool flags. The build items may use
variable substitution. Add the ability to use the variable substitution in
lists. For example:
MORE_FLAGS = ['-more', '-flags']
On 29/6/2022 4:30 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> This patch set adds support to build the RTEMS libraries with gcov
> instrumentation to get code and branch coverage. There are some improvements
> necessary in the build system to support different compiler flags for
> libraries
> and tests. In
On 29/6/2022 4:30 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> Update #4670.
> ---
> cpukit/include/rtems/score/io.h | 4 +
> cpukit/include/rtems/test-info.h| 6 ++
> cpukit/libtest/testgcovdumpinfo.c | 66 ++
> cpukit/score/src/iogcovdumpinfo.c | 101
On 29/6/2022 4:30 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> The waf build system uses lists for tool flags. The build items may use
> variable substitution. Add the ability to use the variable substitution in
> lists. For example:
>
> MORE_FLAGS = ['-more', '-flags']
>
> flags:
> - -some-flag
> -
OK and thanks
Chris
On 29/6/2022 12:19 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> Initialize the debug console only once during early system initialization.
> ---
> bsps/arm/xilinx-zynq/console/debug-console.c | 5 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git
Gedare and Hesham ... congratulations, this is fantastic news.
I know there has been a lot of work in these achievements and they are well
deserved.
Chris
On 29/6/2022 12:23 am, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> Hi
>
> I'd like to congratulate two RTEMS core developers on recent significant
>
On 28/6/2022 11:09 pm, andrew.butterfi...@scss.tcd.ie wrote:
> Dear RTEMS Developers,
>
> While the validation tests from the RTEMS pre-qualification activity are
> now merged into the RTEMS master, the work done in investigating and
> deploying formal methods techniques is not yet merged.
>
>
On 30/6/2022 1:42 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 27/06/2022 08:27, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>> On 27/06/2022 05:02, Chris Johns wrote:
>>> On 24/6/2022 7:44 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 20.06.22 04:03, chr...@rtems.org wrote:
> From: Chris Johns
>
> ---
>
On 30/6/2022 4:34 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 30/06/2022 07:58, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>> On 29/06/2022 17:54, Kinsey Moore wrote:
>>> On 6/29/2022 04:34, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 29/06/2022 11:20, Chris Johns wrote:
>
>> On 29 Jun 2022, at 4:42 pm, Sebastian Huber
>> wrote:
On 6/30/2022 01:34, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 30/06/2022 07:58, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 29/06/2022 17:54, Kinsey Moore wrote:
On 6/29/2022 04:34, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 29/06/2022 11:20, Chris Johns wrote:
On 29 Jun 2022, at 4:42 pm, Sebastian Huber
wrote:
On 29/06/2022 08:40,
On 30/06/2022 09:52, Alexandre Oliva via Gcc-patches wrote:
On Jun 27, 2022, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
I see two potential ways to avoid this:
Another possibility occurred to me: seeking back to the entry we're
about to remove, before removing it. Then, POSIX-compliant
implementations will
On 30/06/2022 07:58, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 29/06/2022 17:54, Kinsey Moore wrote:
On 6/29/2022 04:34, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 29/06/2022 11:20, Chris Johns wrote:
On 29 Jun 2022, at 4:42 pm, Sebastian Huber
wrote:
On 29/06/2022 08:40, Sebastian Huber wrote:
Report the same data
On 15/06/2022 15:08, Gabriel Moyano wrote:
---
testsuites/sptests/sppps01/init.c | 42 +++
1 file changed, 42 insertions(+)
diff --git a/testsuites/sptests/sppps01/init.c
b/testsuites/sptests/sppps01/init.c
index 996a3a1e16..ee3fe1645b 100644
---
Hi Sebastian,
I added this test https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/2022-June/071926.html
some time ago. Could you give me your feedback?
Thanks in advance,
Gabriel
___
devel mailing list
devel@rtems.org
19 matches
Mail list logo
