On 10/03/2022 09:42, Chris Johns wrote:
On 10/3/2022 7:19 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
Hello Chris,
On 23/02/2022 10:17, Sebastian Huber wrote:
I added a --diff option to the spec2modules.py script in rtems-central.git.
You can now unpack a release archive of rtems-central.git and then do the
On 10/3/2022 7:19 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> Hello Chris,
>
> On 23/02/2022 10:17, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>
>> I added a --diff option to the spec2modules.py script in rtems-central.git.
>> You can now unpack a release archive of rtems-central.git and then do the
>> following:
>>
>> 1. Unpack
Hello Chris,
On 23/02/2022 10:17, Sebastian Huber wrote:
I added a --diff option to the spec2modules.py script in
rtems-central.git. You can now unpack a release archive of
rtems-central.git and then do the following:
1. Unpack the RTEMS release archive to "modules/rtems".
2. Unpack the
Hello Chris,
I added a --diff option to the spec2modules.py script in
rtems-central.git. You can now unpack a release archive of
rtems-central.git and then do the following:
1. Unpack the RTEMS release archive to "modules/rtems".
2. Unpack the RTEMS documentation source release archive to
On 17/2/22 5:47 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 17/02/2022 06:11, Chris Johns wrote:
>> On 15/2/22 7:48 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>> On 15/02/2022 02:16, Chris Johns wrote:
On 15/2/22 12:43 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 03/02/2022 09:09, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>> On 30/01/2022
On 17/02/2022 06:11, Chris Johns wrote:
On 15/2/22 7:48 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 15/02/2022 02:16, Chris Johns wrote:
On 15/2/22 12:43 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 03/02/2022 09:09, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 30/01/2022 23:26, Chris Johns wrote:
We just have to create a
release branch
On 15/2/22 7:48 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 15/02/2022 02:16, Chris Johns wrote:
>> On 15/2/22 12:43 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>> On 03/02/2022 09:09, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 30/01/2022 23:26, Chris Johns wrote:
We just have to create a
release branch for RTEMS 6 and
On 15/02/2022 02:16, Chris Johns wrote:
On 15/2/22 12:43 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 03/02/2022 09:09, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 30/01/2022 23:26, Chris Johns wrote:
We just have to create a
release branch for RTEMS 6 and reference release branch commits in the
submodules.
How do you
On 15/2/22 12:43 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 03/02/2022 09:09, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>> On 30/01/2022 23:26, Chris Johns wrote:
>> We just have to create a
>> release branch for RTEMS 6 and reference release branch commits in the
>> submodules.
> How do you validate the
On 03/02/2022 09:09, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 30/01/2022 23:26, Chris Johns wrote:
We just have to create a
release branch for RTEMS 6 and reference release branch commits in the
submodules.
How do you validate the generated sources in the sub-modules match
those in the
branched submodules?
On 30/01/2022 23:26, Chris Johns wrote:
We just have to create a
release branch for RTEMS 6 and reference release branch commits in the
submodules.
How do you validate the generated sources in the sub-modules match those in the
branched submodules? I think this should be done as part of the
On 27/1/22 6:09 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 27/01/2022 03:24, Chris Johns wrote:
>> On 25/1/22 5:37 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>> On 25/01/2022 01:09, Chris Johns wrote:
On 25/1/22 1:39 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> how do we want to proceed with the integration of the new validation
On 27/01/2022 03:24, Chris Johns wrote:
On 25/1/22 5:37 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 25/01/2022 01:09, Chris Johns wrote:
On 25/1/22 1:39 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
how do we want to proceed with the integration of the new validation test suite?
At the moment it is not clear to me what
On 25/1/22 5:37 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 25/01/2022 01:09, Chris Johns wrote:
>> On 25/1/22 1:39 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>> how do we want to proceed with the integration of the new validation test
>>> suite?
>>> At the moment it is not clear to me what issues are left to resolve and
On 25/01/2022 01:09, Chris Johns wrote:
On 25/1/22 1:39 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
how do we want to proceed with the integration of the new validation test suite?
At the moment it is not clear to me what issues are left to resolve and what I
can do to address them?
I believe I have been
On 25/1/22 1:39 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> how do we want to proceed with the integration of the new validation test
> suite?
> At the moment it is not clear to me what issues are left to resolve and what I
> can do to address them?
I believe I have been clear about what I see as being needed:
Hello,
how do we want to proceed with the integration of the new validation
test suite? At the moment it is not clear to me what issues are left to
resolve and what I can do to address them?
--
embedded brains GmbH
Herr Sebastian HUBER
Dornierstr. 4
82178 Puchheim
Germany
email:
On 18/01/2022 02:20, Chris Johns wrote:
On 17/1/22 8:51 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 17/01/2022 09:47, Chris Johns wrote:
On 17/1/22 7:04 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 17/01/2022 08:52, Chris Johns wrote:
My understanding of the status of these patches is the remaining topic is the
release
On 17/1/22 8:51 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 17/01/2022 09:47, Chris Johns wrote:
>> On 17/1/22 7:04 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>> On 17/01/2022 08:52, Chris Johns wrote:
My understanding of the status of these patches is the remaining topic is
the
release dependencies. I have
On 17/01/2022 09:47, Chris Johns wrote:
On 17/1/22 7:04 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 17/01/2022 08:52, Chris Johns wrote:
My understanding of the status of these patches is the remaining topic is the
release dependencies. I have not had time to give this any consideration however
I have a
On 17/1/22 7:04 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 17/01/2022 08:52, Chris Johns wrote:
>> My understanding of the status of these patches is the remaining topic is the
>> release dependencies. I have not had time to give this any consideration
>> however
>> I have a feeling it will not be easy or
On 17/01/2022 08:52, Chris Johns wrote:
My understanding of the status of these patches is the remaining topic is the
release dependencies. I have not had time to give this any consideration however
I have a feeling it will not be easy or simple because of the inter-dependency
of the repos and
On 15/1/22 2:02 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 11/01/2022 17:09, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>
>> I will do a test run on a arm/imx7 board tomorrow. The new validation tests
>> already passed some time ago on this board.
>
> Running the complete new validation test suite revealed a bug in the arm
On 11/01/2022 17:09, Sebastian Huber wrote:
I will do a test run on a arm/imx7 board tomorrow. The new validation
tests already passed some time ago on this board.
Running the complete new validation test suite revealed a bug in the arm
interrupt handling:
On 11/01/2022 17:09, Sebastian Huber wrote:
I implemented the new Interrupt Manager directives for the powerpc/qemu
BSPs. The new validation tests pass now on real hardware (MVME2500).
Passed: 662
Failed: 3
User Input: 5
Expected Fail: 1
Indeterminate: 0
Benchmark:
Hello,
I implemented the new Interrupt Manager directives for the powerpc/qemu
BSPs. The new validation tests pass now on real hardware (MVME2500).
Passed:662
Failed: 3
User Input: 5
Expected Fail: 1
Indeterminate: 0
Benchmark: 3
Timeout: 0
Test too
On 17/12/2021 04:34, Chris Johns wrote:
On 16/12/21 6:36 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 16/12/2021 04:51, Chris Johns wrote:
On 16/12/21 3:27 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 15/12/2021 06:46, Chris Johns wrote:
On 14/12/21 6:24 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
Hello Chris,
On 13/12/2021 22:01,
On 16/12/21 6:36 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 16/12/2021 04:51, Chris Johns wrote:
>> On 16/12/21 3:27 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>> On 15/12/2021 06:46, Chris Johns wrote:
On 14/12/21 6:24 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> Hello Chris,
>
> On 13/12/2021 22:01, Chris Johns wrote:
On 16/12/2021 04:51, Chris Johns wrote:
On 16/12/21 3:27 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 15/12/2021 06:46, Chris Johns wrote:
On 14/12/21 6:24 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
Hello Chris,
On 13/12/2021 22:01, Chris Johns wrote:
On 14/12/21 1:53 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
[...]
We finished the
On 16/12/21 3:27 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 15/12/2021 06:46, Chris Johns wrote:
>> On 14/12/21 6:24 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>> Hello Chris,
>>>
>>> On 13/12/2021 22:01, Chris Johns wrote:
On 14/12/21 1:53 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> [...]
> We finished the specification of the
On 15/12/2021 17:01, Joel Sherrill wrote:
I waited to reply because Chris got most of my questions in his first
response. :)
On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 11:46 PM Chris Johns wrote:
On 14/12/21 6:24 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
Hello Chris,
On 13/12/2021 22:01, Chris Johns wrote:
On 14/12/21
On 15/12/2021 06:46, Chris Johns wrote:
On 14/12/21 6:24 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
Hello Chris,
On 13/12/2021 22:01, Chris Johns wrote:
On 14/12/21 1:53 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
[...]
We finished the specification of the pre-qualified RTEMS feature set. The
specification is available
I waited to reply because Chris got most of my questions in his first
response. :)
On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 11:46 PM Chris Johns wrote:
>
> On 14/12/21 6:24 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> > Hello Chris,
> >
> > On 13/12/2021 22:01, Chris Johns wrote:
> >> On 14/12/21 1:53 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 14/12/21 6:24 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> Hello Chris,
>
> On 13/12/2021 22:01, Chris Johns wrote:
>> On 14/12/21 1:53 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> the ESA activity to pre-qualify parts of RTEMS according to ECSS
>>> requirements is
>>> nearly complete. There is a short
Hello Chris,
On 13/12/2021 22:01, Chris Johns wrote:
On 14/12/21 1:53 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
Hello,
the ESA activity to pre-qualify parts of RTEMS according to ECSS requirements is
nearly complete. There is a short presentation available here:
https://indico.esa.int/event/374/timetable/
What tasks can I do that can help with ECSS compliance?
Zack
On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 at 21:40, Chris Johns wrote:
> On 14/12/21 1:53 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > the ESA activity to pre-qualify parts of RTEMS according to ECSS
> requirements is
> > nearly complete. There is a
On 14/12/21 1:53 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> Hello,
>
> the ESA activity to pre-qualify parts of RTEMS according to ECSS requirements
> is
> nearly complete. There is a short presentation available here:
>
> https://indico.esa.int/event/374/timetable/
Was the change in memory usage for 4.8 of
37 matches
Mail list logo
