Re: Progress of raspberry pi 4 aarch64 BSP

Hey, Maybe this list would help with the 'member who deals with Rasperry Pi' part: https://devel.rtems.org/browser/rtems/MAINTAINERS. Also, if you look down into earlier GSoC projects in RTEMS and the tickets (https://devel.rtems.org/query) that relate to Raspberry Pi, you might be able to get a

Re: [PATCH v7] Update test smpstrongapa01

Great, thanks. I am happy it is finally merged :) On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 10:54 AM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > On 29/06/2021 09:05, Richi Dubey wrote: > > Update smpstrongapa01 to account for task shifting. > > Thanks, I checked it in. >

[PATCH v2] Fix compiler warnings for schedulerstrongapa.c

--- cpukit/score/src/schedulerstrongapa.c | 24 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/cpukit/score/src/schedulerstrongapa.c b/cpukit/score/src/schedulerstrongapa.c index 845d19d1a8..2d138bc7c3 100644 --- a/cpukit/score/src/schedulerstrongapa.c +++

Re: [PATCH] Fix compiler warnings for schedulerstrongapa.c

Done. Can you please check now? I have verified that it works. On Mon, Jul 5, 2021 at 11:09 AM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > On 03/07/2021 09:06, Richi Dubey wrote: > > --- > > cpukit/score/src/schedulerstrongapa.c | 21 +

Re: CPU Context Switch Confusion

Hi, You can try setting up breakpoints at various scheduler decision points, and the function that is called by the executing thread just before it performs context switch. Did you try that? On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 4:36 AM wrote: > Hello, > > > > I am working on re-implementing support for the u

Re: [rtems commit] Update Strong APA Scheduler

Ok, thanks. I have sent a patch, can you please check? On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 2:06 PM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > On 01/07/2021 09:47, Richi Dubey wrote: > > Hi, > > > > How do I reproduce this? I tried u

[PATCH] Fix compiler warnings for schedulerstrongapa.c

--- cpukit/score/src/schedulerstrongapa.c | 21 - 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/cpukit/score/src/schedulerstrongapa.c b/cpukit/score/src/schedulerstrongapa.c index 845d19d1a8..b34ffe4b6d 100644 --- a/cpukit/score/src/schedulerstrongapa.c +++ b/

Re: [rtems commit] Update Strong APA Scheduler

Hi, How do I reproduce this? I tried using the config produced by $ ./waf bsp_defaults --rtems-bsps=arm/realview_pbx_a9_qemu which has: # Warning flags passed to the C and C++ compiler W

Re: source builder fails on master

at 9:46 PM Gedare Bloom wrote: > Run with --no-clean option and see if you can find the config.log for > the expat package. Otherwise, you might try to build that expat > package by hand to see what is failing. > > On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 1:43 AM Richi Dubey wrote: > > > &

Re: source builder fails on master

-gnu-1 On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 1:11 PM Richi Dubey wrote: > Hi, > > I ran the following commands > > mkdir -p $HOME/quick-start/LatestMaster/src > cd $HOME/quick-start/LatestMaster/src > git clone https://github.com/RTEMS/rtems-source-builder.git rsb > git clone https://git

source builder fails on master

Hi, I ran the following commands mkdir -p $HOME/quick-start/LatestMaster/src cd $HOME/quick-start/LatestMaster/src git clone https://github.com/RTEMS/rtems-source-builder.git rsb git clone https://github.com/RTEMS/rtems.git cd $HOME/quick-start/LatestMaster/src/rsb/rtems ../source-builder/sb-set-

Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] Update smpstrongapa01; Add smpstrongapa02,smpstrongapa03

I have sent a new patch, hopefully, it captures the important things we need to check for Strong APA working properly. (Task shifting during task arrival/departure). On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 6:44 PM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > On 25/06/2021 14:19, Ri

[PATCH v7] Update test smpstrongapa01

..8a02265615 100644 --- a/testsuites/smptests/smpstrongapa01/init.c +++ b/testsuites/smptests/smpstrongapa01/init.c @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@ /* + * Copyright (c) 2020 Richi Dubey ( richidu...@gmail.com ) * Copyright (c) 2016, 2017 embedded brains GmbH. All rights reserved. * * embedded brains GmbH

Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] Update smpstrongapa01; Add smpstrongapa02,smpstrongapa03

s was to have more testing - and be more confident that the task-shifting works. I will see if the tests can be merged safely. On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 5:50 PM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > On 16/06/2021 08:00, Richi Dubey wrote: > > Update smpstrongap

[PATCH v6 2/2] Update smpstrongapa01; Add smpstrongapa02,smpstrongapa03

: [] +copyrights: +- Copyright (C) 2020 embedded brains GmbH (http://www.embedded-brains.de) +- Copyright (C) 2020 Richi Dubey (richidu...@gmail.com) +cppflags: [] +cxxflags: [] +enabled-by: +- RTEMS_SMP +features: c cprogram +includes: [] +ldflags: [] +links: [] +source: +- testsuites/smptests

[PATCH v6 1/2] Update Strong APA Scheduler

ights reserved. + * SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-2-Clause * - * embedded brains GmbH - * Dornierstr. 4 - * 82178 Puchheim - * Germany - * + * Copyright (C) 2020 Richi Dubey + * Copyright (c) 2013, 2018 embedded brains GmbH * - * The license and distribution terms for this file may be - * fou

Re: [PATCH v4] Update Strong APA Scheduler

Thanks for the review. I have updated ticket 3053 and sent v5. Can you please check? On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 4:06 PM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > On 11/06/2021 11:47, Richi Dubey wrote: > > diff --git a/cpukit/score/src/schedulerstrongapa.c >

[PATCH v5] Update Strong APA Scheduler

ights reserved. + * SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-2-Clause * - * embedded brains GmbH - * Dornierstr. 4 - * 82178 Puchheim - * Germany - * + * Copyright (C) 2020 Richi Dubey + * Copyright (c) 2013, 2018 embedded brains GmbH * - * The license and distribution terms for this file may be - * fou

Re: [PATCH v3] Update Strong APA Scheduler

Thanks, Done. Can you please check v4? On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 12:36 PM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > On 11/06/2021 09:04, Richi Dubey wrote: > > It is only used in /cpukit/score/src/schedulerstrongapa.c. Is it okay if > > I put it there?

[PATCH v4] Update Strong APA Scheduler

Dornierstr. 4 - * 82178 Puchheim - * Germany - * + * Copyright (C) 2020 Richi Dubey + * Copyright (c) 2013, 2018 embedded brains GmbH * - * The license and distribution terms for this file may be - * found in the file LICENSE in this distribution or at - * http://www.rtems.org/l

Re: [PATCH v3] Update Strong APA Scheduler

It is only used in /cpukit/score/src/schedulerstrongapa.c. Is it okay if I put it there? Thanks. On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 12:12 PM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > On 11/06/2021 07:45, Richi Dubey wrote: > > diff --git a/cpukit/incl

Re: [PATCH v2] Update Strong APA Scheduler

Thanks again for the prompt response. I have sent v3. Can you please check? On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 6:50 PM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > On 10/06/2021 10:49, Richi Dubey wrote: > > +/* Forward Declaration of Per_CPU_Control */ > > +s

[PATCH v3] Update Strong APA Scheduler

ights reserved. + * SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-2-Clause * - * embedded brains GmbH - * Dornierstr. 4 - * 82178 Puchheim - * Germany - * + * Copyright (C) 2020 Richi Dubey + * Copyright (c) 2013, 2018 embedded brains GmbH * - * The license and distribution terms for this file may be - * f

Re: [PATCH v2] Update Strong APA Scheduler

at 7:20 AM Sebastian Huber > wrote: > > > > On 10/06/2021 10:49, Richi Dubey wrote: > > > +/* Forward Declaration of Per_CPU_Control */ > > > +struct Per_CPU_Control; > > > +typedef struct Per_CPU_Control Per_CPU_Control; > > > > Please remove th

Re: [PATCH 1/4] Update Strong APA Scheduler

hat they are in > line with the Doxygen comments you are replace. > > On 09/06/2021 09:39, Richi Dubey wrote: > > #ifndef _RTEMS_SCORE_SCHEDULERSTRONGAPA_H > > #define _RTEMS_SCORE_SCHEDULERSTRONGAPA_H > > > > #include > > -#include > > #inclu

[PATCH v2] Update Strong APA Scheduler

Dornierstr. 4 - * 82178 Puchheim - * Germany - * + * Copyright (C) 2020 Richi Dubey + * Copyright (c) 2013, 2018 embedded brains GmbH * - * The license and distribution terms for this file may be - * found in the file LICENSE in this distribution or at - * http://www.rtems.org/l

[PATCH 4/4] Add test smpstrongapa03

) +- Copyright (C) 2020 Richi Dubey (richidu...@gmail.com) +cppflags: [] +cxxflags: [] +enabled-by: +- RTEMS_SMP +features: c cprogram +includes: [] +ldflags: [] +links: [] +source: +- testsuites/smptests/smpstrongapa03/init.c +stlib: [] +target: testsuites/smptests/smpstrongapa03.exe +type: build +use

[PATCH 3/4] Add test smpstrongapa02

) +- Copyright (C) 2020 Richi Dubey (richidu...@gmail.com) +cppflags: [] +cxxflags: [] +enabled-by: +- RTEMS_SMP +features: c cprogram +includes: [] +ldflags: [] +links: [] +source: +- testsuites/smptests/smpstrongapa02/init.c +stlib: [] +target: testsuites/smptests/smpstrongapa02.exe +type: build +use

[PATCH 2/4] Update test smpstrongapa01

/smpstrongapa01/init.c +++ b/testsuites/smptests/smpstrongapa01/init.c @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@ /* + * Copyright (c) 2020 Richi Dubey ( richidu...@gmail.com ) * Copyright (c) 2016, 2017 embedded brains GmbH. All rights reserved. * * embedded brains GmbH @@ -16,23 +17,28 @@ #include "config.h&quo

[PATCH 1/4] Update Strong APA Scheduler

ief Strong APA Scheduler API */ -/* - * Copyright (c) 2013, 2018 embedded brains GmbH. All rights reserved. +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-2-Clause * - * embedded brains GmbH - * Dornierstr. 4 - * 82178 Puchheim - * Germany - * + * Copyright (C) 2020 Richi Dubey + * Copyright (c) 2013,

[PATCH 0/4] Strong APA Patches

the current SMP schedulers present in RTEMS. Richi Dubey (4): Update Strong APA Scheduler Update test smpstrongapa01 Add test smpstrongapa02 Add test smpstrongapa03 cpukit/include/rtems/scheduler.h | 10 +- .../include/rtems/score/schedulerstrongapa.h | 170 +++- cpukit

Re: About interrupt processing

Thank you. On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 12:32 PM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > On 24/05/2021 11:45, Richi Dubey wrote: > > So, can someone please help me know what gets executed right after the > > interrupt is accepted by the CPU from the IRQ? Ca

About interrupt processing

Hi, When the CPU issues an interrupt, and when the interrupt is processed, where does it run the code from? Is there a place where the commands are written based on the interrupt number? I followed the call to _Scheduler_SMP_Allocate_processor_exact

Re: Writing code that takes time to run

hould be the case for RTEMS. I think by > default energy saving is not used in BSPs. > > I am not sure how qemu will behave. Does someone else have more > information on this one? > > > > Best regards > > > > Jan > > > > *From:* Richi Dubey >

Re: Writing code that takes time to run

execution of this function - as nothing happened? So, if we ask Task A to run T_busy for 5000 ticks, and it gets preempted after 3000 ticks and maybe moves to another CPU, would it run for the remaining 2000 ticks on that CPU? On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 9:50 AM Richi Dubey wrote: > Hi, > > T

Re: How to debug on leon3 with sis and gdb

Thanks for the quick response and the explanation! It was of immense help. On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 2:05 PM Jiri Gaisler wrote: > Forgot copy the list. > > On 5/21/21 7:02 AM, Richi Dubey wrote: > > Hi, > > A test fails at the assert(sc==RTEMS_SUCCES

How to debug on leon3 with sis and gdb

Hi, A test fails at the assert(sc==RTEMS_SUCCESSFUL) after a call to rtems_task_set_affinity. So, following the docs , I figured out where the break point should be set: --- $ ~/quick-start/rtems/6/bin/s

Re: Writing code that takes time to run

late the number of cycles you need to wait for you >> desired certain time and pass it to: void T_busy(uint_fast32_t) >> >> This should give you comparably accurate results over different platforms. >> > > That's certainly a better method than what I suggested.

Writing code that takes time to run

Hi, We are thinking of writing a piece of code that takes some time to run (it would be amazing if it takes around 2 secs to run on hardware, but we would be happy with something that takes a few milliseconds as well). We tried writing this: for(int i = 0; i<1000; ++i){ fib2 = fib0 +

Re: About EDF SMP Behaviour

I understand. Thanks for the quick response! On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 11:58 AM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > > > On 17/05/2021 08:17, Richi Dubey wrote: > > > > Can someone please explain this behavior of EDF SMP Scheduler on a 4 CPU

About EDF SMP Behaviour

Hi, Can someone please explain this behavior of EDF SMP Scheduler on a 4 CPU system, with INIT task pinned to cpu 0: Before Task 3 (Priority 6, Affined to CPU 3) arrival: CPU 1 is executing: Task 1 (Priority 5, Affined to CPU 1) CPU 2 is executing: Task 2 (Priority 7, Affined to CPU 2) CPU 3 is

Re: Error when using RTEMS_MICROSECONDS_TO_TICKS

On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 7:27 PM Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > > On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 1:11 AM Gedare Bloom wrote: > >> On Sun, May 9, 2021 at 9:33 AM Richi Dubey wrote: >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > I am using the line: >> rtems_task_wake_aft

Re: timing on qemu

Thank you for the reply. I should have searched for the definition before asking for help. On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 11:39 AM Gedare Bloom wrote: > On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 12:09 PM Richi Dubey wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > When I use benchmark_timer_initialize() an

Re: qemu-system-ppc64 does not work on powerpc/qoriq_e6500_64

Great, thanks. On Mon, 10 May 2021, 23:04 Karel Gardas, wrote: > On 5/10/21 2:26 PM, Richi Dubey wrote: > > Thanks, I'll check it out. > > -bios `where you do have`/u-boot.e500. > > Karel > > > > > On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 10:19 AM Sebastian Hube

Re: qemu-system-ppc64 does not work on powerpc/qoriq_e6500_64

Thanks, I'll check it out. On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 10:19 AM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > On 09/05/2021 06:02, Richi Dubey wrote: > > 0x42c8 199 SET_SELF_CPU_CONTROL CPU_SELF, r5 > > (gdb) > > 0x00

Error when using RTEMS_MICROSECONDS_TO_TICKS

Hi, I am using the line: rtems_task_wake_after(RTEMS_MICROSECONDS_TO_TICKS(6000)); in my test program to emulate a 6 seconds sleep. But when I deubg the program using qemu, I do not see it waiting for 6 seconds; on debugging, there is a error of a shared library file not found, which leads to the

Re: qemu-system-ppc64 does not work on powerpc/qoriq_e6500_64

, 2021 at 7:58 PM Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > On Sat, May 8, 2021, 11:03 PM Richi Dubey wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I tried with both smp and sp tests: >> >> -- - >> ---

qemu-system-ppc64 does not work on powerpc/qoriq_e6500_64

Hi, I tried with both smp and sp tests: -- - - rdubey@hpc1:~/quick-start$ ~/quick-start/rtems/6/bin/powerpc-rtems6-gdb --command=~/quick-start/rtems/6/bin/ppc.gdb ~/quick-start/src/rtems/build/powerpc/q

timing on qemu

Hi, When I use benchmark_timer_initialize() and later read the value with benchmark_timer_read(), it always shows 0 for me in qemu. Is this expected? I am using the arm/realview_pbx_a9_qemu bsp, qemu 4.1.0, and I built the testsuites with waf. Thanks!

Re: qemu version for source builder

Thanks, I will try this. I hope it works. On Fri, May 7, 2021 at 2:07 PM Karel Gardas wrote: > On 5/7/21 8:15 AM, Richi Dubey wrote: > > So, does this qemu not support e6500 cores (for the t2080rdb platform)? > > IIRC e500/e5500/e6500 are supported by ppc

qemu version for source builder

Hi, rdubey@hpc1:~/quick-start/src/rsb$ ~/quick-start/rtems/6/bin/qemu-system-ppc64 -machine help Supported machines are: 40p IBM RS/6000 7020 (40p) bamboo bamboo g3beige Heathrow based PowerMAC mac99Mac99 based PowerMAC mpc8544ds

Re: About finding the bsp for qemu ( t2080rdb)

5500 update here. > > So just compile bsp and try it in qemu and see for yourself, perhaps you > will be more lucky and get that running well... > > Good luck! > Karel > > On 5/4/21 7:33 AM, Richi Dubey wrote: > > Hi? > > > > On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 12:01 PM R

Re: About finding the bsp for qemu ( t2080rdb)

Hi? On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 12:01 PM Richi Dubey wrote: > Hi, > > I looked at the docs > <https://docs.rtems.org/branches/master/user/bsps/bsps-powerpc.html#qemuppc>, > and I want to build a bsp that I can test on qemu (it would be best if the > bsp models qoriq t

About finding the bsp for qemu ( t2080rdb)

Hi, I looked at the docs , and I want to build a bsp that I can test on qemu (it would be best if the bsp models qoriq t2080). The doc says that "qoriq_e6500_64 (64-bit ISA) variants support the T-series chips such as T208

Re: RTEMS Bootstrap fails

> > > *From:* devel *On Behalf Of *Richi Dubey > *Sent:* Sunday, April 25, 2021 01:05 > *To:* Vijay Kumar Banerjee > *Cc:* rtems-de...@rtems.org > *Subject:* Re: RTEMS Bootstrap fails > > > > Hi, > > > > The docs > <https://docs.rtems.org/branches

Re: RTEMS Bootstrap fails

27; : /bin/gzip Checking for program 'rtems-ld' : /home/rdubey/quick-start/rtems/6/bin/rtems-ld Checking for program 'rtems-syms' : /home/rdubey/quick-start/rtems/6/bin/rtems-syms Checking for program 'xz' : /usr/bin/xz Un

Re: RTEMS Bootstrap fails

Cool, Thanks! On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 10:40 AM Vijay Kumar Banerjee wrote: > On Sat, Apr 24, 2021 at 11:08 PM Richi Dubey wrote: > > > > It does. Thanks for your prompt response! > > > > Also, how do I enable SMP tests and rtems-debug? > > I think the option

Re: RTEMS Bootstrap fails

It does. Thanks for your prompt response! Also, how do I enable SMP tests and rtems-debug? On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 9:03 PM Vijay Kumar Banerjee wrote: > Hi Richi, > > > On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 9:22 AM Richi Dubey wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I am buildin

RTEMS Bootstrap fails

Hi, I am building a new RTEMS from master source (to build the xilinx_zynqmp_lp64 bsp from the aarch64 arch), and these are the steps I followed: mkdir -p $HOME/quick-start/src cd $HOME/quick-start/src git clone https://github.com/RTEMS/rtems-source-builder.git rsb git clone https://github.com/RT

Re: Booting a rtems exe on Zynq UltraScale+ MPSoC ZCU106 board

neric build instructions for u-boot on the > ZynqMP platform. > > > Kinsey > On 4/20/2021 07:00, Richi Dubey wrote: > > Thanks! > > Can you please tell me more about: > >> build a new u-boot that can do what you need and then package it into >> BOOT.bin usi

Re: Booting a rtems exe on Zynq UltraScale+ MPSoC ZCU106 board

y, these changes are unfit for inclusion in RTEMS and my next > step is to work on the MMU driver to avoid these alignment problems. > > > Kinsey > On 4/19/2021 00:19, Richi Dubey wrote: > > Thanks! > > Can I get rtems to build images as an AArch64 code, so that I don

Re: Booting a rtems exe on Zynq UltraScale+ MPSoC ZCU106 board

available on github). From what I remember, the ARMv7 BSP for ZynqMP > mentions booting over JTAG. > > > Kinsey > On 4/14/2021 13:18, Richi Dubey wrote: > > Hi Jan, Kinsey, > > Thanks for your quick responses. > > I rebuilt the .img file with -O rtems option, and

Re: Booting a rtems exe on Zynq UltraScale+ MPSoC ZCU106 board

Which yields for me: > > Image Type: ARM RTEMS Kernel Image (gzip compressed) > > > > IIRC the difference between -O rtems and -O linux is subtle, but maybe > that helps. > > > > Best regards, > > > > Jan > > > > > > *From:* dev

Re: Booting a rtems exe on Zynq UltraScale+ MPSoC ZCU106 board

ble to drop the FDT commands > since that what appears to be causing the problem and I don’t think that > the arm/xilinx_zynqmp BSP uses it at all. > > > > Kinsey > > > > *From:* Richi Dubey > *Sent:* Wednesday, April 14, 2021 01:01 > *To:* Kinsey Moore ; rtems-de..

Booting a rtems exe on Zynq UltraScale+ MPSoC ZCU106 board

Hi, I followed the 8.2.23 docs to build rtems for the xilinx_zynqmp_ultra96 bsp since it was the only bsp corresponding to xilinx-zynqmp in the rtems-bsp. Then I followed the boot via Uboot section 8.2.1.1 on docs

About Strong APA scheduler

Hi, The ticket 2510 (https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/2510) which is about the Strong APA scheduler is going to be closed very soon! We are giving a few touches to the code tests before we submit the final patch. The documentation of the scheduler is live at: https://richidubey.github.io/Strong-APA

Re: Two Resource Leaks

realview_pbx_a9_qemu Cool, that's interesting. On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 6:38 PM Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 7:56 AM Richi Dubey wrote: > >> >> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/12FkAE6Wvo0dDw9D75p-w8UISc8_aOKQqntvruGGdeN4/edit#gid=0 &g

Re: Two Resource Leaks

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/12FkAE6Wvo0dDw9D75p-w8UISc8_aOKQqntvruGGdeN4/edit#gid=0 This sheet has rtems-test result comparisons between different SMP schedulers set as default schedulers and has results from last the 2 months. This might be of help to you. On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 9:50

Re: About scheduler entry point add_processor

Thanks for the help. On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 8:07 PM Gedare Bloom wrote: > On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 11:11 PM Richi Dubey wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I remember reading somewhere that the add_processor function is only > used when a processor is explicitly added du

Re: About locks and concurrency rules for SMP systems

Got it. Thank you for the clarification. On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 8:32 PM Gedare Bloom wrote: > On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 11:30 PM Richi Dubey wrote: > > > > Thanks for your quick response! > > > >> Each scheduler has its own lock. There are a couple of more locks &g

Re: Two Resource Leaks

I believe that cause of the recent commits in the last two months, these are the tests that have started failing on master: dl09.exe psxpasswd02.exe pwdgrp01.exe shell01.exe sptimecounter02.exe ttest02.exe and a timeout: smpmrsp01.ex On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 3:21 AM Joel Sherrill wrote: > Hi >

Re: About locks and concurrency rules for SMP systems

. _Scheduler_Acquire_critical( scheduler, &lock_context ); to lock access to the current scheduler-specific data structures. What other locks do we have related to schedulers? On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 1:03 PM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > On 24/03/2021 08:07, Rich

About scheduler entry point add_processor

Hi, I remember reading somewhere that the add_processor function is only used when a processor is explicitly added during runtime of an application :p, Is that correct?Please let me know which test tests/uses this function. Thanks. ___ devel mailing lis

[PATCH] Update Strong APA definition

--- c-user/scheduling-concepts/smp-schedulers.rst | 15 --- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/c-user/scheduling-concepts/smp-schedulers.rst b/c-user/scheduling-concepts/smp-schedulers.rst index cfab04f..d8ea725 100644 --- a/c-user/scheduling-concepts/smp-sc

Re: [PATCH] Add configuration option for single processor applications

.io/pdf/bloom_scheduling_2014.pdf > Now things are a little bit more complicated by SMP. Capturing this > knowledge is important. Got it. Thanks! On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 11:08 PM Gedare Bloom wrote: > On Sun, Mar 21, 2021 at 11:48 PM Richi Dubey wrote: > > > > Hi! >

About locks and concurrency rules for SMP systems

Hi, How does RTEMS handle cases where two different cores access scheduler-related functions at the same time? For ex., Can they access (or modify) the Scheduler_strong_APA_Context at the same time? Thanks

Re: rtems-test not running tests for leon3

The test does not execute TEST_END() and exits just like that: https://git.rtems.org/rtems/tree/testsuites/samples/minimum/init.c#n31, hence it is always flagged as a failure in rtems-test. On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 2:55 AM Chris Johns wrote: > On 24/3/21 1:18 am, Richi Dubey wrote: > &

Re: rtems-test not running tests for leon3

Afaik minimum tests are supposed to fail. On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 7:37 PM Ryan Long wrote: > Hi, > > > > I’ve been trying to run the tests for leon3, but the only test that runs > properly is the minimum test. All of the others produce output like so in > the log file. > > > > [334/597] p:0 f

Re: [PATCH] Add configuration option for single processor applications

f guidance, so I guess clear blog > posts are helpful for now. Okay, I am on it. *How to write a scheduler: RTEMS edition* coming soon on https://rtemswithrichi.wordpress.com/ :p On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 2:15 AM Gedare Bloom wrote: > Hi Richi, > > On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 1:06 PM

Re: About is_non_preempt_mode_supported

> > It would not provide anything, and it might encourage a false sense of > concurrency-safety. I understand. Thanks! On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 12:40 AM Gedare Bloom wrote: > On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 11:25 AM Richi Dubey wrote: > > > > Thanks for your help! I read th

Re: About is_non_preempt_mode_supported

7;t see any harm in having a processor run a no preempt thread in an SMP environment. Thanks! On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 6:14 PM Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 1:54 AM Richi Dubey wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I am debugging tm19 running on Stro

Re: [PATCH] Add configuration option for single processor applications

efine _CONFIGURE_MAXIMUM_PROCESSORS CONFIGURE_MAXIMUM_PROCESSORS > #else >#define _CONFIGURE_MAXIMUM_PROCESSORS 1 > #endif I can see this in percpu.h. It's weird that make still gave an error! On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 9:50 PM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: >

About is_non_preempt_mode_supported

Hi, I am debugging tm19 running on Strong APA scheduler. It gives the following error: rtems_signal_catch FAILED -- expected (RTEMS_SUCCESSFUL) got (RTEMS_NOT_IMPLEMENTED) which is due to line 167 . This arises because the var

[PATCH] Add configuration option for single processor applications

This change sets the value of number of processor as 1 for a single processor application. Useful when trying to run a single processor application on a multi processor scheduler. --- cpukit/include/rtems/confdefs/scheduler.h | 4 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) diff --git a/cpukit/include

Re: Current master fails make

s.rtems.org/pipermail/users/2021-March/068264.html > > Hope that helps! > > On Mon, Mar 15, 2021, 12:02 PM Richi Dubey wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> When I run make, I get this error >> /home/richi/quick-start/LatestStrong/src/rtems/c/src/../../testsuites/psxtests/p

Current master fails make

Hi, When I run make, I get this error /home/richi/quick-start/LatestStrong/src/rtems/c/src/../../testsuites/psxtests/psxftw01/init.c:44:10: fatal error: ftw.h: No such file or directory 44 | #include I think its because of this commit; https://git.rtems.org/rtems/commit/testsuites/psxtests/ps

Re: About HEAP error

FREE_PATTERN is 3876142303. So I know that the function _ARM_Wait_for_event is the one that actually corrupts this value. But, the backtrace does not help much. Which function calls this function? What is the trace of this function? On Sat, Mar 6, 2021 at 10:28 AM Richi Dubey wrote: > Th

Re: About HEAP error

array element outside its array size), but if that is true, there should be a lot more failure with HEAP_ERROR. I would still give it a look. Thanks again for your help. On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 7:01 PM Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 4, 2021, 11:31 PM Richi Dubey wrote: > >

Re: About HEAP error

> > > On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 9:50 AM Gedare Bloom wrote: > > >> > > >> On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 12:08 AM Richi Dubey > wrote: > > >> > > > >> > What's the element written after the free? I set a watch at the > exact b

Re: About HEAP error

(volatile uint32_t *) 0x1020; (gdb) On Wed, Mar 3, 2021 at 12:31 PM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > On 02/03/2021 05:44, Richi Dubey wrote: > > > > > (gdb) p *(Heap_Error_context*)(0x00206d7c) > > $5 = { > > heap = 0x20

Re: About HEAP error

Thank you for the suggestion. I will look into it. On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 9:43 PM Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 1, 2021 at 10:44 PM Richi Dubey wrote: > >> Oh, that makes sense. Thank you. >> >> I got this: >> >> (gdb) p *(Heap_Error

Re: About HEAP error

ll try to find out more about this error. On Mon, Mar 1, 2021 at 8:30 PM Gedare Bloom wrote: > On Sun, Feb 28, 2021 at 10:53 PM Richi Dubey wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I get this error on sp02: > > > > *** FATAL *** > > fatal source: 13 (RTEMS_FA

About HEAP error

Hi, I get this error on sp02: *** FATAL *** fatal source: 13 (RTEMS_FATAL_SOURCE_HEAP) CPU: 0 fatal code: 2125180 (0x00206d7c) RTEMS version: 6.0.0.44ae183090f3bc1a4ee281ff98525209b3fda7a7-modified RTEMS tools: 10.2.1 20210125 (RTEMS 6, RSB ade089253e70d75105a8311844f82f6d20cc30a8, Newlib cb41c37

Re: About Chains in RTEMS

Thanks a lot! Your suggestion helps. I'll look if there is any place where double insertion/extraction is taking place. On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 8:57 PM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > On 25/02/2021 10:47, Richi Dubey wrote: > > > Hi, > >

About Chains in RTEMS

Hi, When I am debugging the call to _Chain_Append_unprotected (from line 92 of sp02, rtems_task_delete -> _Thread_Close ->...->_Thread_Cancel -> ... ->_Scheduler_Unblock -> ... _Scheduler_strong_APA_Insert_ready -> _Chain_Append

Re: About Thread_Cancel

oom wrote: > On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 12:54 AM Richi Dubey wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > Can someone please give a brief overview of what these three lines aim > to achieve: > > > > } else if ( _Thread_Is_life_change_allowed( previous ) ) { > > _T

Re: About Thread_Cancel

Hi Sebastian, Thank you for the help. I will look further into this. Best Regards, Richi. On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 10:37 PM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > Hello Richi, > > the reason for the reference counted life change request and this > sequence of block/unbloc

About Thread_Cancel

Hi, Can someone please give a brief overview of what these three lines aim to achieve: } else if ( _Thread_Is_life_change_allowed( previous ) ) { _Thread_Add_life_change_request( the_thread ); _Thread_State_release( the_thread, &lock_context ); _Thread_Finalize_life_change( the_thr

Re: How do we know what priority of the Init task is?

Hi, Just confirming, The initial priority is 1, and when converted to _RTEMS_Priority_To_core, it becomes 2 (because of the append indicator added by default map priority). Right? On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 11:19 PM Richi Dubey wrote: > Awesome, thanks! > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 9:5

Re: Getting an error after a test ends

embedded-brains.de> wrote: > On 08/02/2021 06:08, Richi Dubey wrote: > > > On checking docs, I saw that SMP Fatal Code 0 points > > to SMP_FATAL_BOOT_PROCESSOR_NOT_ASSIGNED_TO_SCHEDULER. This error is > > thrown after the end of the test, so should I worry about it? - > >

  1   2   3   4   >