Re: doctest rtems example
Hi Sam,
Thanks for the post. The website for the code is:
https://github.com/doctest/doctest
I have been using this and I can port tests between Linux and RTEMS. I like it
because it works and it is a single header. There is no need to build and link
libraries.
Chris
On 16/6/2023 11:07 pm, Sam Price wrote:
> /* Tell doctest to not use its own main */
> #define DOCTEST_CONFIG_IMPLEMENT
> /* tell doctest to not use sigint that rtems does not have */
> #define DOCTEST_CONFIG_NO_POSIX_SIGNALS
> #include "doctest.h"
>
> /* Setup command line part */
> const char rtems_test_name[] = "DOCTEST UNIT TESTS";
>
> static int run_doctest_tests(int argc, char **argv) {
>
> // Initialize doctest context
> doctest::Context context(argc, argv);
>
> int test_result = context.run(); // run queries, or run tests unless --no-run
>
> if(context.shouldExit()) // honor query flags and --exit
> return test_result;
> return 0;
> }
>
> rtems_shell_cmd_t Shell_DOCTEST_Command = {
> "doctest", /* name */
> "doctest [doctest options]", /* usage */
> "tests", /* topic */
> run_doctest_tests, /* command */
> NULL, /* alias */
> NULL /* next */
> };
>
> /* Inside of your Init add the following prior to starting shell */
> rtems_task Init(rtems_task_argument ignored)
> {
>
>
> rtems_shell_add_cmd_struct(&Shell_DOCTEST_Command);
> /* Note i made this high priority, some of my tests require priority access.
> */
> /* It may be better to use 100, and use the following in your test
> rtems_task_priority old_priority;
> rtems_task_set_priority(RTEMS_SELF, 0, &old_priority);
> ...
> rtems_task_set_priority(RTEMS_SELF, old_priority, 0x0);
> */
>
> rtems_shell_init("shell0", 20 * 1024, 2, "/dev/console", 0, 1, NULL);
> ...
> }
>
> TEST_CASE("testing the addition function") {
> CHECK((2 + 2) == 4);
> CHECK((2 + 2) == 4.0);
> }
> ___
> 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
Re: BSP .inc files and .cfg files
On 17/6/2023 5:30 am, Joel Sherrill wrote: > On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 3:18 AM Philip Kirkpatrick > mailto:p.kirkpatr...@reflexaerospace.com>> > wrote: > > For the RPU patch, I'll add removing this to my next pass at it. > > If there is some transformation on the linked executable needed to download > it, > I hope you document that entire process in the Users Guide. :) I suspect there is a whole book on how that could be done. On the Versal it may be as simple as an SMC call but I would need to check the calls on the Versal [1]. I think it would take a binary image in DDR. I am not sure what is needed on the ZymqMP? Chris [1] https://github.com/kiwichris/rtems-xilinx-xrt/tree/main/rtems ___ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: bsps/xilinx-zynqmp : Add BSP for RPU
On 17/6/2023 5:14 am, Gedare Bloom wrote: > On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 2:17 AM Philip Kirkpatrick > wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 7:14 AM Chris Johns wrote: >>> >>> On 15/6/2023 6:16 pm, Philip Kirkpatrick wrote: Thanks for all the good feedback. RE Joel: I'll fix my sloppy formatting that you caught and submit a revised patch. If I'm realistic about my schedule, I probably won't be able to get to it until next week. For xttcps_hw.h, there already is one #ifndef __rtems__ around the #includes, but on review there is another spot where I got lazy and used a #if 0. I'll correct that too. Other than that, the file is unmodified. On the discussion about a shared space, I'll leave that decision up to you. Tell me what you want and I can adjust as needed, or it could be done in a follow-on patch. >>> >>> Should the RPU BSP be located under bsps/arm/xilinx-rpu? >> >> >> I went back and forth on that decision and decided to keep them combined >> since the APU and RPU share a moderate amount of code. However, I can >> definitely see an argument that they are different enough to split. If you >> want it the other way, I can make that change when I address the other items. Thanks, I think this is worth while. > I think we should split it out. Shared code should likely be > refactored to arm/shared depending what that is. Agreed. I am fine with the code moving, leaving the arm/xilinx-zynqmp BSP as is because it may be removed (see below). > I'm not sure that carrying forward a 32-bit arm/xilinx-zynqmp makes > sense now that we have a functional aarch64 port. Splitting the RPU > out will make it easier to make that decision. I agree. I think it is confusing. I also think it should happen before 6. Chris ___ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
[libbsd 6-freebsd-12 PATCH v2] rtemsbsd/versal_slcr: Fix Versal GEM clock set
From: Aaron Nyholm
---
rtemsbsd/sys/arm64/xilinx/versal_slcr.c | 30 +
rtemsbsd/sys/arm64/xilinx/versal_slcr.h | 6 +
2 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/rtemsbsd/sys/arm64/xilinx/versal_slcr.c
b/rtemsbsd/sys/arm64/xilinx/versal_slcr.c
index 74ebde91..fea3abab 100644
--- a/rtemsbsd/sys/arm64/xilinx/versal_slcr.c
+++ b/rtemsbsd/sys/arm64/xilinx/versal_slcr.c
@@ -80,8 +80,9 @@ cgem_set_ref_clk(int unit, int frequency)
{
struct versal_slcr_softc *sc = versal_slcr_softc_p;
int div, last_error = 0;
- uint64_t clk_ctrl, pll_ctrl;
+ uint64_t clk_ctrl, pll_ctrl, to_xpd_ctrl;
uint32_t clk_ctrl_val, pll_ctrl_val, pll_freq, pll_reset, pll_bypass;
+ uint32_t clk_src_sel, to_xpd_ctrl_val, to_xpd_div, to_xpd_freq;
if (!sc)
return (-1);
@@ -126,15 +127,36 @@ cgem_set_ref_clk(int unit, int frequency)
}
/* Apply divider */
- pll_freq >>= (pll_ctrl_val & VERSAL_SLCR_PLL_CTRL_DIV_MASK) >>
VERSAL_SLCR_PLL_CTRL_DIV_SHIFT;
+ pll_freq >>= (pll_ctrl_val & VERSAL_SLCR_PLL_CTRL_DIV_MASK) >>
VERSAL_SLCR_PLL_CTRL_DIV_SHIFT;
+
+ /* Check if routed through {X}PLL_TO_XPD_CLK to GEM{unit}_REF_CLK and
adjust */
+ clk_src_sel = (clk_ctrl_val & VERSAL_SLCR_GEM_CLK_CTRL_SRCSEL_MASK);
+ to_xpd_ctrl = 0;
+ if (clk_src_sel == VERSAL_SLCR_GEM_CLK_CTRL_SRCSEL_P_PLL) {
+ to_xpd_ctrl = VERSAL_SLCR_PPLL_TO_XPD_CTRL;
+ } else if (clk_src_sel == VERSAL_SLCR_GEM_CLK_CTRL_SRCSEL_N_PLL) {
+ to_xpd_ctrl = VERSAL_SLCR_NPLL_TO_XPD_CTRL;
+ }
+
+ if (to_xpd_ctrl != 0) {
+ to_xpd_ctrl_val = RD4(sc, to_xpd_ctrl);
+ to_xpd_div = (to_xpd_ctrl_val &
VERSAL_SLCR_XPD_CLK_CTRL_DIVISOR_MASK);
+ to_xpd_div = to_xpd_div >> VERSAL_SLCR_XPD_CTRL_DIV_SHIFT;
+ if (to_xpd_div == 0) {
+ to_xpd_div = 1;
+ }
+ to_xpd_freq = pll_freq / to_xpd_div;
+ } else {
+ to_xpd_freq = pll_freq;
+ }
/* Find suitable divisor. Linear search, not the fastest method but hey.
*/
for (div = 1; div <= VERSAL_SLCR_GEM_CLK_CTRL_DIVISOR_MAX; div++) {
-int div_freq = pll_freq / div;
+ int div_freq = to_xpd_freq / div;
int error = abs(frequency - div_freq);
if (error >= last_error && last_error != 0) {
- div--;
+ div--;
break;
}
last_error = error;
diff --git a/rtemsbsd/sys/arm64/xilinx/versal_slcr.h
b/rtemsbsd/sys/arm64/xilinx/versal_slcr.h
index e1c967ac..121c1e0a 100644
--- a/rtemsbsd/sys/arm64/xilinx/versal_slcr.h
+++ b/rtemsbsd/sys/arm64/xilinx/versal_slcr.h
@@ -78,6 +78,12 @@
#define VERSAL_SLCR_GEM_CLK_CTRL_SRCSEL_R_PLL(1<<0)
#define VERSAL_SLCR_GEM_CLK_CTRL_SRCSEL_N_PLL(3<<0)
+#define VERSAL_SLCR_PPLL_TO_XPD_CTRL (VERSAL_SLCR_CRF_OFFSET + 0x100)
+#define VERSAL_SLCR_NPLL_TO_XPD_CTRL (VERSAL_SLCR_CRF_OFFSET + 0x104)
+#define VERSAL_SLCR_XPD_CLK_CTRL_DIVISOR_MAX 0x3ff
+#define VERSAL_SLCR_XPD_CLK_CTRL_DIVISOR_MASK
(VERSAL_SLCR_XPD_CLK_CTRL_DIVISOR_MAX<<8)
+#define VERSAL_SLCR_XPD_CTRL_DIV_SHIFT 8
+
#define VERSAL_DEFAULT_PS_CLK_FREQUENCY
#ifdef _KERNEL
--
2.25.1
___
devel mailing list
devel@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
rtemsbsd/versal_slcr: Fix Versal GEM clock set
Updated formatting. ___ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
