Re: [PATCH] tests: Add and use

On 30/9/20 3:55 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: > On 30/09/2020 07:52, Chris Johns wrote: > >> On 29/9/20 11:31 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: >>> Add the build option RTEMS_TEST_VERBOSITY to control the verbosity of >>> test suites using the RTEMS test framework. >> Does this create another build

Re: [PATCH] tests: Add and use

On 30/09/2020 07:52, Chris Johns wrote: On 29/9/20 11:31 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: Add the build option RTEMS_TEST_VERBOSITY to control the verbosity of test suites using the RTEMS test framework. Does this create another build variant? Each build option creates variants. Why would I play

Re: [PATCH] tests: Add and use

On 29/9/20 11:31 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: > Add the build option RTEMS_TEST_VERBOSITY to control the verbosity of > test suites using the RTEMS test framework. Does this create another build variant? Why would I play with this option? Chris ___

Re: [PATCH v2 3/8] bsps: Break out AArch32 portions of GPT driver

On 30/09/2020 02:16, Kinsey Moore wrote: -Original Message- From: Sebastian Huber Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 06:22 To: Kinsey Moore ; devel@rtems.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/8] bsps: Break out AArch32 portions of GPT driver On 28/09/2020 17:24, Kinsey Moore wrote: create

Re: [PATCH v2 6/8] score: Add AArch64 port

On 29/9/20 9:37 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: > On 28/09/2020 17:24, Kinsey Moore wrote: > >> +/* TODO(kmoore) The current implementation here assumes that SP is not >> misaligned */ > Maybe add a ticket for this TODO and reference it in the comment. >> +    .macro    JUMP_HANDLER >> +    mov x0,

Re: Build Sweeps Before Full Switch To Waf

On 30/9/20 10:22 am, Joel Sherrill wrote: > I updated https://devel.rtems.org/wiki/Release/6/Waf%20BSP%20Checklist to > include this. I have added a "Builds Match" column to help track this. Chris ___ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org

Build Sweeps Before Full Switch To Waf

Hi Over the weekend, I think the modifications to my existing build sweeper reached the point where test results for BSPs on simulators were reported got an autoconf build followed by a waf build of the same configuration. The results should be the same. I have made some headway on a special

RE: [PATCH v2 3/8] bsps: Break out AArch32 portions of GPT driver

-Original Message- From: Sebastian Huber Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 06:22 To: Kinsey Moore ; devel@rtems.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/8] bsps: Break out AArch32 portions of GPT driver On 28/09/2020 17:24, Kinsey Moore wrote: > create mode 100644

Re: Purpose of rtems_device_driver?

I wasn't thinking about user code, I was thinking about the RTEMS source code and that the construct should go away. The typedef should be gotten rid of in a way that supports user code for a release or so. > On Sep 29, 2020, at 15:34 , Joel Sherrill wrote: > > I'm not disagreeing with you at

Re: Purpose of rtems_device_driver?

I'm not disagreeing with you at all Peter. This is definitely history and a "grep -r _routine | grep typedef" will show a few other cases where this pattern still exists. In at least one, it is internal and deprecated. You are right. This is from the earliest days of RTEMS. I looked in the

Re: Purpose of rtems_device_driver?

> On Sep 29, 2020, at 10:13 , Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 8:54 AM Sebastian Huber > wrote: > On 29/09/2020 15:47, Sebastian Huber wrote: > > > On 29/09/2020 15:42, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 8:37 AM Sebastian Huber > >> >>

Recent rtems-bsp-builder results

Hi Has anyone run this lately? I got all failures on my sweep over the weekend. That doesn't match my results by hand where I built and ran tests on some. --joel ___ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

New Build Sweeps

Hi I am starting to do a sweep of all BSPs with various configure options and build them back to back with autoconf and waf with the same options. I am just doing a basic sweep now of SMP on/off and Debug on/off and reporting issues as I spot them. Overnight a build sweep completed which had

[PATCH 0/1] rtems: Generate

This header file with Doxygen markup contains the documentation corresponding to: https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/2020-September/062395.html Sebastian Huber (1): rtems: Generate cpukit/include/rtems/io.h | 480 -- 1 file changed, 351

[PATCH 1/1] rtems: Generate

The manager documentation is a consolidation of the comments in Doxygen markup and the documentation sources in Sphinx markup. The documentation was transfered to interface specification items. This header file was generated from the items by a script. Change license to BSD-2-Clause according

[PATCH 1/1] c-user: Generate I/O Manager documentation

The manager documentation is a consolidation of the comments in Doxygen markup and the documentation sources in Sphinx markup. The documentation was transfered to interface specification items. This header file was generated from the items by a script. Update #3993. ---

[PATCH 0/1] c-user: Generate I/O Manager documentation

This is the first generated documentation of a manager. For the PDF output please have a look at: https://ftp.rtems.org/pub/rtems/people/sebh/c-user.pdf Please review the layout. I changed the layout to use definition lists instead of tables. The benefit of definition lists is that the layout

Re: Purpose of rtems_device_driver?

On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 8:54 AM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > On 29/09/2020 15:47, Sebastian Huber wrote: > > > On 29/09/2020 15:42, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 8:37 AM Sebastian Huber > >> >>

Re: Purpose of rtems_device_driver?

On 29/09/2020 15:47, Sebastian Huber wrote: On 29/09/2020 15:42, Joel Sherrill wrote: On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 8:37 AM Sebastian Huber > wrote:     Hello,     I work currently on the documentation of the IO Manager. What is the     purpose of   

Re: Purpose of rtems_device_driver?

On 29/09/2020 15:42, Joel Sherrill wrote: On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 8:37 AM Sebastian Huber > wrote: Hello, I work currently on the documentation of the IO Manager. What is the purpose of typedef rtems_status_code

Re: Purpose of rtems_device_driver?

On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 8:37 AM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > Hello, > > I work currently on the documentation of the IO Manager. What is the > purpose of > > typedef rtems_status_code rtems_device_driver; > > ? > > For me this looks a bit like camouflage. > No.

Purpose of rtems_device_driver?

Hello, I work currently on the documentation of the IO Manager. What is the purpose of typedef rtems_status_code rtems_device_driver; ? For me this looks a bit like camouflage. ___ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org

[PATCH] tests: Add and use

Add the build option RTEMS_TEST_VERBOSITY to control the verbosity of test suites using the RTEMS test framework. --- spec/build/testsuites/grp.yml | 2 ++ spec/build/testsuites/optverbosity.yml| 27 +++ spec/build/testsuites/testopts.yml| 13

RE: [PATCH v2 2/8] spec: Add missing spintrcritical24 definition

-Original Message- From: Sebastian Huber Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 06:09 To: Kinsey Moore ; RTEMS Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] spec: Add missing spintrcritical24 definition On 28/09/2020 17:24, Kinsey Moore wrote: > --- > spec/build/bsps/tstnointrcrit.yml | 1 + > 1 file

RE: [PATCH v2 1/8] Move ARM PL011 UART driver

I'll include this change in the next version of the patch. Kinsey -Original Message- From: Sebastian Huber Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 05:59 To: Kinsey Moore ; devel@rtems.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/8] Move ARM PL011 UART driver On 28/09/2020 17:24, Kinsey Moore wrote: > This

RE: [PATCH v2 2/2] Add AArch64 documentation

There are some rudimentary pieces of SMP support in the port itself, but it is certainly not complete and is untested. That work is planned for the next phase of development at which point I'll update the BSPs to support that as well if they require any changes at all. Kinsey -Original

RE: [PATCH v2 1/2] cpu-supplement: Fix formatting and missing words

It was already an odd hybrid of a marked up list and a grammatical list that I noticed while I was working on the AArch64 documentation. I figured I'd push it one way or the other since mixing the constructs looks weird, but I can drop the changes unrelated to AArch64 if you prefer. Kinsey

Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] bsps: Add Cortex-A53 ILP32 BSP variant

On 28/09/2020 17:24, Kinsey Moore wrote: diff --git a/spec/build/bsps/aarch64/a53/bspa53ilp32qemu.yml b/spec/build/bsps/aarch64/a53/bspa53ilp32qemu.yml new file mode 100644 index 00..3e32999860 --- /dev/null +++ b/spec/build/bsps/aarch64/a53/bspa53ilp32qemu.yml @@ -0,0 +1,73 @@

Re: License files missing on 5-freebsd-12 branch

On 29/09/2020 03:35, Chris Johns wrote: > On 28/9/20 9:45 pm, Christian Mauderer wrote: >> Sorry for the delay. I didn't manage to do these before my vacation and >> then I forgot them during vacation. I just pushed them. > > No problem and thank you. I hope you had a relaxing vacation? > >

Re: [PATCH v2 7/8] bsps: Add Cortex-A53 LP64 basic BSP

On 28/09/2020 17:24, Kinsey Moore wrote: diff --git a/bsps/aarch64/shared/start/linkcmds.base b/bsps/aarch64/shared/start/linkcmds.base new file mode 100644 index 00..f67404ab62 --- /dev/null +++ b/bsps/aarch64/shared/start/linkcmds.base @@ -0,0 +1,450 @@ +/* SPDX-License-Identifier:

Re: [PATCH v2 6/8] score: Add AArch64 port

On 28/09/2020 17:24, Kinsey Moore wrote: + RTEMS_STATIC_ASSERT( +offsetof( Context_Control, thread_id ) + == AARCH64_CONTEXT_CONTROL_THREAD_ID_OFFSET, +AARCH64_CONTEXT_CONTROL_THREAD_ID_OFFSET + ); Wrong indentation level. It would be good to add assertions for all offset

Re: [PATCH v2 6/8] score: Add AArch64 port

On 28/09/2020 17:24, Kinsey Moore wrote: +#include + + +void *_CPU_Thread_Idle_body( uintptr_t ignored ) +{ + while ( true ) { +__asm__ volatile ("wfi"); + } +} + Too many blank lines. ___ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org

Re: [PATCH v2 6/8] score: Add AArch64 port

On 28/09/2020 17:24, Kinsey Moore wrote: +/* TODO(kmoore) The current implementation here assumes that SP is not misaligned */ Maybe add a ticket for this TODO and reference it in the comment. + .macro JUMP_HANDLER + mov x0, #0x7f /* mask to use in BIC, lower 7

Re: [PATCH v2 6/8] score: Add AArch64 port

On 28/09/2020 17:24, Kinsey Moore wrote: diff --git a/cpukit/include/rtems/score/tls.h b/cpukit/include/rtems/score/tls.h index 65a49d87be..66961f0083 100644 --- a/cpukit/include/rtems/score/tls.h +++ b/cpukit/include/rtems/score/tls.h @@ -85,7 +85,9 @@ typedef struct TLS_Thread_control_block {

Re: [PATCH v2 5/8] bsps/shared: Add PSCI-based bspreset implementation

On 28/09/2020 17:24, Kinsey Moore wrote: This adds a bsp_reset implementation based on the ARM PSCI specification often present in ARMv8 systems. --- bsps/shared/start/bspreset-psci.c | 56 +++ Maybe name it bspreset-arm-psci.c

Re: [PATCH v2 4/8] bsps: Break out AArch32 GICv3 support

On 28/09/2020 17:24, Kinsey Moore wrote: This breaks out AArch32-specific code so that the shared GICv3 code can be reused by other architectures. I would place the shared IRQ controller support in: bsps/include/dev/irq bsps/shared/dev/irq The bsp_interrupt_dispatch() is declared in:

Re: [PATCH v2 3/8] bsps: Break out AArch32 portions of GPT driver

On 28/09/2020 17:24, Kinsey Moore wrote: create mode 100644 bsps/include/bsp/clock-arm-generic-timer.h rename bsps/{arm/shared/clock/clock-generic-timer.c => shared/clock/clock-arm-generic-timer.c} (71%) I would add it as: bsps/shared/dev/clock/arm-generic-timer.c

Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] spec: Add missing spintrcritical24 definition

On 28/09/2020 17:24, Kinsey Moore wrote: --- spec/build/bsps/tstnointrcrit.yml | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/spec/build/bsps/tstnointrcrit.yml b/spec/build/bsps/tstnointrcrit.yml index 0460aaabb3..46f7d974c8 100644 --- a/spec/build/bsps/tstnointrcrit.yml +++

Re: [PATCH v2 1/8] Move ARM PL011 UART driver

On 28/09/2020 17:24, Kinsey Moore wrote: This UART driver is now needed for BSPs other than ARM. --- bsps/arm/headers.am| 2 -- bsps/arm/raspberrypi/console/console-config.c | 2 +- bsps/arm/realview-pbx-a9/include/bsp/console.h

RTEMS Pre-Qualification Status

Hello, I would like to give a status report about the RTEMS pre-qualification activity and an outlook to the work ahead. Since my last report in July this year https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/2020-July/060566.html a lot happened in the RTEMS Project. The RTEMS specification