>
>From: rtems-devel-boun...@rtems.org [rtems-devel-boun...@rtems.org] on behalf
>of Philipp Eppelt [philipp.epp...@mailbox.tu-dresden.de]
>Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 5:49 AM
>To: rtems-devel@rtems.org
>Subject: New configure option RTEMS_VIRTUAL
>
>
On 9/17/2013 9:16 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 2013-09-17 16:05, Joel Sherrill wrote:
Hi
Take a peek at Issue 1063872 and 1063873. These are in main_help.c
and I think Scan is not happy with newlib's putchar() macro. It
increments the buffer pointer but it always ends up one past
what you use
On 9/17/2013 9:51 AM, Rempel, Cynthia wrote:
From: rtems-devel-boun...@rtems.org [rtems-devel-boun...@rtems.org] on behalf
of Philipp Eppelt [philipp.epp...@mailbox.tu-dresden.de]
Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 5:49 AM
To: rtems-devel@rtems.org
Subject
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 8:49 AM, Philipp Eppelt
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> in my GSOC project I aim for a virtualized version of RTEMS. I develop
> it for the i386 target and moved the interrupt.h code to libcpu to be
> included dependent on the CPU target. So a native cpu still gets the
> normal code, but
I don't know what is wrong but it doesn't apply. :(
patching file merge-helpers/check_submission
patch: malformed patch at line 110: '0' to give only important stuff.
On 9/17/2013 12:24 PM, Vipul Nayyar wrote:
> ---
> merge-helpers/check_submission | 776
> +++-
Hey Joel and Vipul,
I applied and committed it. Please verify.
-Gedare
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Joel Sherrill
wrote:
> I don't know what is wrong but it doesn't apply. :(
>
> patching file merge-helpers/check_submission
> patch: malformed patch at line 110: '0' to give only important
Committed.
You have really had to dig around in the dirt
but have gotten the hang of it. The BSPs are
the product of a lot of coders over a long
period of time and it is hard to move them all
to the "new right" place. We learn as we go
along and want to do things clearer, better,
and share more co
Hello Philipp,
Good Job.This interrupt virtualization part is probably the hardest to
implement in the Hypervisor and it's very dependent on the underlying
architecture. Actually, I think this is even harder to implement in intel
architectures due to its interrupt model and limitations on the ISA
Hi
Take a peek at Issue 1063872 and 1063873. These are in main_help.c
and I think Scan is not happy with newlib's putchar() macro. It
increments the buffer pointer but it always ends up one past
what you use on any given call.
Since the pointer ends up pointing at something which is not
visibly
On 9/17/2013 3:21 PM, Chris Johns wrote:
> Gedare Bloom wrote:
>>>
>>> RTEMS_HYPERVISOR or RTEMS_VIRTUAL
>>>
>> I'm preferential to this high-level switch. I would avoid
>> RTEMS_HYPERVISOR, because RTEMS is not the hypervisor, it is the guest
>> VM.
>>
>
> And RTEMS_VIRTUAL could be taken to mean
Hi Vipul Nayyar,
The output is really informative!
The output says not compiled, sometimes and not installed other times... How is
the script checking for compiling vs. installing?
This output gives us enough information to put together some Google Code In
tasks (if we get selected this winter
Gedare Bloom wrote:
RTEMS_HYPERVISOR or RTEMS_VIRTUAL
I'm preferential to this high-level switch. I would avoid
RTEMS_HYPERVISOR, because RTEMS is not the hypervisor, it is the guest
VM.
And RTEMS_VIRTUAL could be taken to mean RTEMS supports virtual memory.
What about RTEMS_HYPERVISOR_GUE
Vipul
Make sure it gives the same results after check in
that it did from your local version.
Paranoid sounding but better to be safe than sorry.
On 9/17/2013 1:12 PM, Vipul Nayyar wrote:
> Hello Gedare, Joel
>
> Thanks for committing it. I can see it
> here
> http://git.rtems.org/rtems-testin
---
merge-helpers/check_submission | 776 +++--
1 file changed, 590 insertions(+), 186 deletions(-)
diff --git a/merge-helpers/check_submission b/merge-helpers/check_submission
index e838121..90908f1 100755
--- a/merge-helpers/check_submission
+++ b/merge-helpe
On 2013-09-17 16:05, Joel Sherrill wrote:
Hi
Take a peek at Issue 1063872 and 1063873. These are in main_help.c
and I think Scan is not happy with newlib's putchar() macro. It
increments the buffer pointer but it always ends up one past
what you use on any given call.
Since the pointer ends up
Hi,
in my GSOC project I aim for a virtualized version of RTEMS. I develop
it for the i386 target and moved the interrupt.h code to libcpu to be
included dependent on the CPU target. So a native cpu still gets the
normal code, but the virtual one will call the virtualization layer.
This leads to
Hi Cindy,
yes, that's the next thing on my list.
Cheers
Philipp
On 09/16/2013 06:39 PM, Rempel, Cynthia wrote:
> Hi Philipp Eppelt,
>
> Could you put that information on the wiki page for your project, so the next
> student that works on the project will know where to start?
>
> Thanks,
> Cin
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 9:51 AM, Sebastian Huber <
sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote:
> On 2013-09-14 00:05, Chris Johns wrote:
>
>> Gedare Bloom wrote:
>>
>>>
What is the use case and benefit of this libmm? Currently I see some
low-level changes, but what is the application or
On 2013-09-14 00:05, Chris Johns wrote:
Gedare Bloom wrote:
What is the use case and benefit of this libmm? Currently I see some
low-level changes, but what is the application or kernel level use case?
The immediate goal would be to support POSIX mprotect on BSPs that can
(and to ignore it o
19 matches
Mail list logo
