Re: [PATCH] cpu-supplement: Add ARM BSPs chapter

On 05/06/18 16:28, Joel Sherrill wrote: Not sure why I haven't weighed in yet. On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 8:56 AM, Gedare Bloom > wrote: Hi Sebastian, Joel: I am unsure about the placement of BSP guidance in the User Manual. I like the change overall it is p

Re: [PATCH v3] tester: Add script to generate html coverage report from covoar output

On Wed, 6 Jun 2018, 01:52 Joel Sherrill, wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 5, 2018, 7:22 PM Vijay Kumar Banerjee < > vijaykumar9...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 6 June 2018 at 03:57, Joel Sherrill wrote: >> >>> I think everything is pushed. Is there any patch outstanding? >>> >> >>> Thank you. >> No outstan

Re: [PATCH] Generate coverage analysis Report

On Wed, 6 Jun 2018, 05:07 Vijay Kumar Banerjee, wrote: > On Wed, 6 Jun 2018, 08:31 Joel Sherrill, wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 5, 2018, 9:54 PM Chris Johns wrote: >> >>> >>> On 31/5/18 6:44 am, Vijay Kumar Banerjee wrote: >>> > On 31 May 2018 at 02:02, Joel Sherrill >> j...@rtems.org>> >>> > w

Re: RISC-V tool chain

On 05/06/18 16:07, Gedare Bloom wrote: On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 9:30 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote: Hello, the RISC-V is a new architecture and the tool chain is still under active development. For example one bug which blocks the RTEMS support of the 64-bit RISC-V was fixed this week: https://sour

Re: [PATCH v2] tester: Add script to generate html coverage report from covoar output

On Tue, Jun 5, 2018, 10:21 PM Chris Johns wrote: > On 1/6/18 9:13 am, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > Just chatted with Chris. The coverage BSP ini file was a temporary > > measure as I thought. > > I may have not understood the specific issue being discussed when we > talked. > > I separated the INI fi

Re: [PATCH] Generate coverage analysis Report

On Tue, Jun 5, 2018, 11:07 PM Vijay Kumar Banerjee wrote: > On Wed, 6 Jun 2018, 08:31 Joel Sherrill, wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 5, 2018, 9:54 PM Chris Johns wrote: >> >>> >>> On 31/5/18 6:44 am, Vijay Kumar Banerjee wrote: >>> > On 31 May 2018 at 02:02, Joel Sherrill >> j...@rtems.org>> >>>

Re: [PATCH] Generate coverage analysis Report

On Wed, 6 Jun 2018, 08:31 Joel Sherrill, wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 5, 2018, 9:54 PM Chris Johns wrote: > >> >> On 31/5/18 6:44 am, Vijay Kumar Banerjee wrote: >> > On 31 May 2018 at 02:02, Joel Sherrill > j...@rtems.org>> >> > wrote: >> > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 3:29 PM, Vijay Kumar Banerjee

Re: [PATCH v2] tester: Add script to generate html coverage report from covoar output

On 1/6/18 9:13 am, Joel Sherrill wrote: > Just chatted with Chris. The coverage BSP ini file was a temporary > measure as I thought. I may have not understood the specific issue being discussed when we talked. I separated the INI files because this is what we do else where (see the leon3 example

Re: [PATCH] Generate coverage analysis Report

On Tue, Jun 5, 2018, 9:54 PM Chris Johns wrote: > > On 31/5/18 6:44 am, Vijay Kumar Banerjee wrote: > > On 31 May 2018 at 02:02, Joel Sherrill j...@rtems.org>> > > wrote: > > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 3:29 PM, Vijay Kumar Banerjee > > mailto:vijaykumar9...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > >

Re: [PATCH] Generate coverage analysis Report

On 31/5/18 6:44 am, Vijay Kumar Banerjee wrote: > On 31 May 2018 at 02:02, Joel Sherrill > > wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 3:29 PM, Vijay Kumar Banerjee > mailto:vijaykumar9...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > On 31 May 2018 at 00:28, Joel Sherrill

Re: (release notes generator) Do we need to worry about attachment?

Hi, For the record this topic was resolved in our meeting. Attachments will not be inlined in the release notes and a link where possible will be provided. Expansion of links to inline them is problematic because of dependencies, size and varying formats, for example how do you place a compressed

Re: [GSoC - x86_64 BSP] Using fPIC to compile RTEMS as a shared library

On 4/6/18 7:49 pm, Amaan Cheval wrote: > Please let me know if that approach doesn't make sense - given that > there is no dynamic loader in the RTEMS kernel as far as I know, There is a dynamic loader in RTEMS called libdl. It is not based around the ELF standard loader used for shared libraries

Re: configure/make with multiple jobs error?

On 31/5/18 2:56 am, Gedare Bloom wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 12:15 PM, Gedare Bloom wrote: >> On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 12:10 PM, Gedare Bloom wrote: >>> Hello all, >>> >>> I got a strange error just now with a fresh toolchain and current master. >>> >>> I did: >>> $ ../../rtems/configure --ta

Re: [PATCH v3] tester: Add script to generate html coverage report from covoar output

On Wed, 6 Jun 2018, 06:22 Joel Sherrill, wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 5, 2018, 7:22 PM Vijay Kumar Banerjee < > vijaykumar9...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 6 June 2018 at 03:57, Joel Sherrill wrote: >> >>> I think everything is pushed. Is there any patch outstanding? >>> >> >>> Thank you. >> No outstan

Re: [PATCH v3] tester: Add script to generate html coverage report from covoar output

On Tue, Jun 5, 2018, 7:22 PM Vijay Kumar Banerjee wrote: > On 6 June 2018 at 03:57, Joel Sherrill wrote: > >> I think everything is pushed. Is there any patch outstanding? >> > >> Thank you. > No outstanding patch, everything on my side is squashed into it. :) > So we can (finally) switch to th

Re: [PATCH v3] tester: Add script to generate html coverage report from covoar output

On 6 June 2018 at 03:57, Joel Sherrill wrote: > I think everything is pushed. Is there any patch outstanding? > > Thank you. No outstanding patch, everything on my side is squashed into it. :) > On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 3:44 PM, Vijay Kumar Banerjee < > vijaykumar9...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Add su

Re: [PATCH v3] tester: Add script to generate html coverage report from covoar output

I think everything is pushed. Is there any patch outstanding? On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 3:44 PM, Vijay Kumar Banerjee < vijaykumar9...@gmail.com> wrote: > Add support in tester to run covoar and generate an html report to display > the summary of the coverage reports generated from covoar. > > Co-au

Re: [GSoC - x86_64 BSP] Using fPIC to compile RTEMS as a shared library

On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 4:27 PM, Amaan Cheval wrote: > Hi! Thanks for the guidance, both of you! I think we're quite close > now to integrating gnu-efi in and finally having the stub port boot as > a UEFI application image. All the test exe's generated on my local > tree are now dynamic libraries,

Re: [GSoC - x86_64 BSP] Using fPIC to compile RTEMS as a shared library

Hi! Thanks for the guidance, both of you! I think we're quite close now to integrating gnu-efi in and finally having the stub port boot as a UEFI application image. All the test exe's generated on my local tree are now dynamic libraries, so both Newlib and crtbeginS/crtendS issues have been resolve

[PATCH] x86_64/binutils: Add PEI target to build UEFI application images

Original commit in binutils: https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=binutils-gdb.git;a=commitdiff;h=421acf18739edb54111b64d2b328ea2e7bf19889 Update #2898 --- rtems/config/5/rtems-x86_64.bset | 5 + 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) diff --git a/rtems/config/5/rtems-x86_64.bset b/rtems/config/

Compiler Explorer Website

Hi Came across this and thought the community would be interested. https://gcc.godbolt.org/# Play. :) --joel ___ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: [PATCH] Adding tracing documentation in user manual

On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 11:40 AM, Vidushi Vashishth wrote: > --- > user/index.rst| 2 + > user/tracing/development.rst | 12 ++ > user/tracing/index.rst| 25 > user/tracing/introduction.rst | 90 > +++ > user/traci

Re: [PATCH] Adding tracing documentation in user manual

Hi! This is a rough skeleton of the tracing chapter in the user manual documentation with some incomplete bits. I have covered the "to be completed bits" in some of my blogs and that should not take much time to finish. Let me know if you have suggestions. Thanks! Vidushi On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at

[PATCH] Adding tracing documentation in user manual

--- user/index.rst| 2 + user/tracing/development.rst | 12 ++ user/tracing/index.rst| 25 user/tracing/introduction.rst | 90 +++ user/tracing/usecases.rst | 77 5 files cha

Re: RISC-V tool chain

On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 9:07 AM, Gedare Bloom wrote: > On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 9:30 AM, Sebastian Huber > wrote: > > Hello, > > > > the RISC-V is a new architecture and the tool chain is still under active > > development. For example one bug which blocks the RTEMS support of the > > 64-bit RISC-V

Re: [PATCH] cpu-supplement: Add ARM BSPs chapter

Not sure why I haven't weighed in yet. On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 8:56 AM, Gedare Bloom wrote: > Hi Sebastian, Joel: > > I am unsure about the placement of BSP guidance in the User Manual. I > like the change overall it is positive to create high-quality BSP > documentation. Someone mentioned dupl

Re: RISC-V tool chain

On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 9:30 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote: > Hello, > > the RISC-V is a new architecture and the tool chain is still under active > development. For example one bug which blocks the RTEMS support of the > 64-bit RISC-V was fixed this week: > > https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.c

Re: [PATCH] cpu-supplement: Add ARM BSPs chapter

Hi Sebastian, Joel: I am unsure about the placement of BSP guidance in the User Manual. I like the change overall it is positive to create high-quality BSP documentation. I have 2 concerns: 1. It should be clearly labelled as an incomplete set of the BSPs however. Right now, if someone picks up t

RISC-V tool chain

Hello, the RISC-V is a new architecture and the tool chain is still under active development. For example one bug which blocks the RTEMS support of the 64-bit RISC-V was fixed this week: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23244 The GDB support is only available in the developmen