Is something similar going to be needed for architecture and BSP specific IDLE threads?
--joel On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 1:09 AM Chris Johns <chr...@rtems.org> wrote: > OK > > Chris > > On 25/7/2023 4:04 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108658 > > > > This GCC bug leads to an incomplete code coverage status. > > > > Update #4932. > > --- > > cpukit/score/cpu/no_cpu/cpuidle.c | 7 +++++++ > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/cpukit/score/cpu/no_cpu/cpuidle.c > b/cpukit/score/cpu/no_cpu/cpuidle.c > > index bff1309d39..a6001e73b0 100644 > > --- a/cpukit/score/cpu/no_cpu/cpuidle.c > > +++ b/cpukit/score/cpu/no_cpu/cpuidle.c > > @@ -33,6 +33,13 @@ > > > > void *_CPU_Thread_Idle_body( uintptr_t ignored ) > > { > > + /* > > + * This is a workaround for: > > + * > > + * https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108658 > > + */ > > + __asm__ volatile (""); > > + > > while ( true ) { > > /* Do nothing */ > > } > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > devel@rtems.org > http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel >
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel