Hello,
while working on STM32H7 I've noticed that rng is not working well.
Tracked that down to stm32h7_rng_enable function not being properly
called as it should be. The function call should be enforced by:
RTEMS_SYSINIT_ITEM(
stm32h7_rng_enable,
RTEMS_SYSINIT_DEVICE_DRIVERS,
On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 12:20 PM Sam Price wrote:
> How hard are the microblaze patches going to be to apply?
>
Alex is out today but the Microblaze gcc and binutils are based off
versions Xilinx has
patches for. Right now, the microblaze is using this.
tools/rtems-xilinx-binutils-2.36
How hard are the microblaze patches going to be to apply?
On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 1:19 PM Kinsey Moore
wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 11:58 AM Joel Sherrill wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 1:26 AM Sebastian Huber <
>> sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>>
On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 11:58 AM Joel Sherrill wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 1:26 AM Sebastian Huber <
> sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> it seems the RTEMS 6.1 release is getting closer. We should think about
>> the tool versions for the release.
>>
>> For
On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 1:26 AM Sebastian Huber <
sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> it seems the RTEMS 6.1 release is getting closer. We should think about
> the tool versions for the release.
>
> For GCC, my preferred choice would be GCC 13.2:
>
>
On 29.06.23 22:47, Karel Gardas wrote:
There is no point in wasting precious memory space on enforced section
alignment for the purpose of MPU which is not implemented on M4 core
anyway.
Thanks, looks good.
--
embedded brains GmbH
Herr Sebastian HUBER
Dornierstr. 4
82178 Puchheim
Germany
Hello Karel,
On 30.06.23 11:40, Karel Gardas wrote:
so what is the best way to test GCC 13.2 with RTEMS 6? Is
../source-builder/sb-set-builder --prefix=
--with-rtems-gcc=tools/rtems-gcc-13-newlib-head 6/rtems-all
canonical way how to build those tools for RTEMS 6? Or is there some
Hello Sebastian,
so what is the best way to test GCC 13.2 with RTEMS 6? Is
../source-builder/sb-set-builder --prefix=
--with-rtems-gcc=tools/rtems-gcc-13-newlib-head 6/rtems-all
canonical way how to build those tools for RTEMS 6? Or is there some
trickery involved I do not see yet?
Hello,
even though the clang-format support for RTEMS is not yet perfect, I
think it would still make sense to already add the clang format file to
the RTEMS repository. This helps to get the currently best thing
available and for example use it for new code (BSPs).
--
embedded brains GmbH
Hello,
it seems the RTEMS 6.1 release is getting closer. We should think about
the tool versions for the release.
For GCC, my preferred choice would be GCC 13.2:
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2023-June/241838.html
In GCC 12 a big change was enabling the vectorization support with -O2.
On 29.06.23 02:20, Chris Johns wrote:
On 28/6/2023 3:33 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 28.06.23 04:37, Chris Johns wrote:
Can you please provide something other than update in the commit message?
If it is to pick up patches on these gcc release branches then please say so.
This update has
On 28.06.23 20:30, Kinsey Moore wrote:
rtems_task_wake_after takes a parameter in terms of a count of clock
ticks and not a measure in a subunit of seconds. This updates
documentation to reflect that and recommends clock_nanosleep() for
applications requiring sleep for a time-based duration
12 matches
Mail list logo
