Re: [PATCH] LICENSE.BSD-2-Clause: Prefer no license text

On 19/02/2020 08:54, Chris Johns wrote: On 19/2/20 6:13 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: Update #3053. --- LICENSE.BSD-2-Clause | 11 ++- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/LICENSE.BSD-2-Clause b/LICENSE.BSD-2-Clause index 60a74e9adf..b58cfd6aa4 100644 ---

Re: [PATCH] LICENSE.BSD-2-Clause: Prefer no license text

On 19/2/20 6:13 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: > Update #3053. > --- > LICENSE.BSD-2-Clause | 11 ++- > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/LICENSE.BSD-2-Clause b/LICENSE.BSD-2-Clause > index 60a74e9adf..b58cfd6aa4 100644 > --- a/LICENSE.BSD-2-Clause > +++

Re: [PATCH] eng: Rework file template section

On 19/2/20 6:07 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: > Update #3053. > --- > eng/coding-file-hdr.rst | 161 > +++- > 1 file changed, 131 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/eng/coding-file-hdr.rst b/eng/coding-file-hdr.rst > index

[PATCH v6] Add new COPYING file

Update #3053. --- v2: Add Hesham Almatary: https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/3053#comment:6 v3: Add Jiri Gaisler: https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/3053#comment:7 I am not sure about the first contribution year. v4: Add GCI contributors: Abhimanyu Raghuvanshi Himanshu Sekhar Nayak Jacob Shin

[PATCH] LICENSE.BSD-2-Clause: Prefer no license text

Update #3053. --- LICENSE.BSD-2-Clause | 11 ++- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/LICENSE.BSD-2-Clause b/LICENSE.BSD-2-Clause index 60a74e9adf..b58cfd6aa4 100644 --- a/LICENSE.BSD-2-Clause +++ b/LICENSE.BSD-2-Clause @@ -21,7 +21,16 @@ If more than one

[PATCH] eng: Rework file template section

Update #3053. --- eng/coding-file-hdr.rst | 161 +++- 1 file changed, 131 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-) diff --git a/eng/coding-file-hdr.rst b/eng/coding-file-hdr.rst index c724c5d..788da95 100644 --- a/eng/coding-file-hdr.rst +++

Re: [PATCH v5] Add new COPYING file

On 19/02/2020 07:43, Chris Johns wrote: Should it also discuss what we want in files, ie SPDX? No, this should go into the RTEMS Software Engineering manual. I work on an update right now. I am wondering about a simple statement with a reference to the Eng manual for more detail. This is

Re: [PATCH v5] Add new COPYING file

On 19/2/20 5:37 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: > On 19/02/2020 07:16, Chris Johns wrote: >>> What about this COPYING file? >>> >> Does it need to deal with new files being added to the repo? > > Each file should be still self-contained in terms of copyright and license. > > I would like to have a

Re: [PATCH v5] Add new COPYING file

On 19/02/2020 07:16, Chris Johns wrote: What about this COPYING file? Does it need to deal with new files being added to the repo? Each file should be still self-contained in terms of copyright and license. I would like to have a file which lists everyone who agreed to the BSD-2-Clause

Re: Top of file: licence header or Doxygen comment?

On 19/2/20 5:18 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: > I want to add a header and source file header template to the RTEMS Software > Engineering manual. What should be on the top of the file? The license header > or > the Doxygen file comment block? License header. Chris

Top of file: licence header or Doxygen comment?

Hello, I want to add a header and source file header template to the RTEMS Software Engineering manual. What should be on the top of the file? The license header or the Doxygen file comment block? -- Sebastian Huber, embedded brains GmbH Address : Dornierstr. 4, D-82178 Puchheim, Germany

Re: [PATCH v5] Add new COPYING file

On 19/2/20 5:04 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: > On 06/12/2019 07:16, Sebastian Huber wrote: >> Ping. >> >> On 19/12/2018 13:37, Sebastian Huber wrote: >>> Update #3053. >>> --- >>> v2: >>> >>> Add Hesham Almatary: >>> >>> https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/3053#comment:6 >>> >>> v3: >>> >>> Add Jiri

Re: [PATCH v5] Add new COPYING file

On 06/12/2019 07:16, Sebastian Huber wrote: Ping. On 19/12/2018 13:37, Sebastian Huber wrote: Update #3053. --- v2: Add Hesham Almatary: https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/3053#comment:6 v3: Add Jiri Gaisler: https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/3053#comment:7 I am not sure about the first

Re: [4.11 PATCH] libcsupport/newlib: Call newlib's __sinit to force reent initialisation

On 18/2/20 7:33 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: > On 18/02/2020 01:25, chr...@rtems.org wrote: >> From: Chris Johns >> >> - Newlib overtites any FILE pointers set in stdin, stdout or stderr. >> >> Closes #3870 >> --- >>   cpukit/libcsupport/src/newlibc_reent.c | 5 - >>   1 file changed, 4

Re: SPDX License Identifier Only and Full Copy?

On 19/2/20 2:58 am, Gedare Bloom wrote: > On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 6:07 AM Joel Sherrill wrote: >> On Tue, Feb 18, 2020, 3:08 AM Sebastian Huber >> wrote: >>> >>> On 06/12/2019 07:15, Sebastian Huber wrote: Hello, should we use only the SPDX License Identifier and the list of

Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] amd64: Add to build

Looks good. Thanks Chris On 18/2/20 9:21 pm, Jan Sommer wrote: > --- > libbsd.py | 25 + > waf_libbsd.py | 13 +++-- > 2 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/libbsd.py b/libbsd.py > index 3823c03f..db4b4c63 100644 > ---

Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] [rtems-libbsd] Fix compilation for amd64

On 18/2/20 9:21 pm, Jan Sommer wrote: > Similar to the previous patchset for i386 this one enables compilation for > the amd64 BSP with the following limitations: > - dev_nic_e1000 needs to be off > - debugger01.exe does not link because the amd64 bsp has no libdebugger > support But

Re: Project for GSoC 2020

Based on your feedback, adding memory protection or enhancing Wi-fi Support in libbsd are two projects that I would like to work upon. For MMU support I think a lot unmerged PowerPC code is already present, but since I

AW: Loading RTEMS applications from u-boot on Raspberry Pi 2

Hi Cláudio, I build a current BSP for the raspberry pi 2 recently (atm without SMP though). > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- > Von: devel [mailto:devel-boun...@rtems.org] Im Auftrag von Cláudio Maia > Gesendet: Montag, 17. Februar 2020 21:19 > An: devel@rtems.org > Betreff: Loading RTEMS

Re: Project query

Hello Suyash, On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 8:07 AM suyash singh wrote: > > Hello, > > I am interested in "Port RTEMS to MicroBlaze" > https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/2902 > > How do I start understanding the previous work done and understanding what > else needs to be done? > Hopefully Hesham or Joel

Re: SPDX License Identifier Only and Full Copy?

On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 6:07 AM Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > > On Tue, Feb 18, 2020, 3:08 AM Sebastian Huber > wrote: >> >> On 06/12/2019 07:15, Sebastian Huber wrote: >> > Hello, >> > >> > should we use only the SPDX License Identifier and the list of >> > copyrights for new or license converted

Re: Loading RTEMS applications from u-boot on Raspberry Pi 2

Hii, Regarding loading RTEMS images using U-Boot. It is necessary that you provide a DTB file. So, your commands should be $ mkimage -A arm -O linux -T kernel -a 0x20 -e 0x200080 -d kernel.img -C none rtems.img Can you please let me know if -O rtems works for you. I have tried using it but

Project query

Hello, I am interested in "Port RTEMS to MicroBlaze" https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/2902 How do I start understanding the previous work done and understanding what else needs to be done? ___ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org

rtems6 tool build failures

Hi Just passing along a few tool build failures. Not sure why the Microblaze was the only one with the __assert_func() and RISC-V had the C99 issue I would have thought was common. Are these on unique git hashes? Microblaze: https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/build/2020-February/010416.html

All BSPs Fail to build with BSP Builder on rtems 6

Hi Not sure what's up but here's the message to the build@ list. https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/build/2020-February/010431.html I'm teaching this week but looking at a build log from a single BSP, I see these: gmake[4]: Entering directory

Re: SPDX License Identifier Only and Full Copy?

On Tue, Feb 18, 2020, 3:08 AM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > On 06/12/2019 07:15, Sebastian Huber wrote: > > Hello, > > > > should we use only the SPDX License Identifier and the list of > > copyrights for new or license converted files, e.g. > > > > /* > > *

[PATCH v4 1/3] amd64: Add missing files from FreeBSD

--- freebsd/sys/amd64/amd64/in_cksum.c| 245 freebsd/sys/amd64/include/machine/_bus.h | 48 + freebsd/sys/amd64/include/machine/cpufunc.h | 1047 + freebsd/sys/amd64/include/machine/efi.h | 78 ++ freebsd/sys/amd64/include/machine/in_cksum.h |

[PATCH v4 3/3] amd64: Port to RTEMS

--- freebsd/sys/amd64/include/machine/cpufunc.h | 6 ++ rtemsbsd/amd64/include/machine/clock.h | 2 ++ 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+) create mode 100644 rtemsbsd/amd64/include/machine/clock.h diff --git a/freebsd/sys/amd64/include/machine/cpufunc.h

[PATCH v4 0/3] [rtems-libbsd] Fix compilation for amd64

Similar to the previous patchset for i386 this one enables compilation for the amd64 BSP with the following limitations: - dev_nic_e1000 needs to be off - debugger01.exe does not link because the amd64 bsp has no libdebugger support I tried to use the lessons learned from the last patch set. It

[PATCH v4 2/3] amd64: Add to build

--- libbsd.py | 25 + waf_libbsd.py | 13 +++-- 2 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/libbsd.py b/libbsd.py index 3823c03f..db4b4c63 100644 --- a/libbsd.py +++ b/libbsd.py @@ -90,6 +90,17 @@ _defaults = { 'cpu-include-paths':

Re: SPDX License Identifier Only and Full Copy?

On 06/12/2019 07:15, Sebastian Huber wrote: Hello, should we use only the SPDX License Identifier and the list of copyrights for new or license converted files, e.g. /*  * SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-2-Clause  *  * Copyright (C) ,  */ or should we append in addition the full

Re: [4.11 PATCH] libcsupport/newlib: Call newlib's __sinit to force reent initialisation

On 18/02/2020 01:25, chr...@rtems.org wrote: From: Chris Johns - Newlib overtites any FILE pointers set in stdin, stdout or stderr. Closes #3870 --- cpukit/libcsupport/src/newlibc_reent.c | 5 - 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git