Hi Gedare, Joel, >> For clang support, I've made start by following the steps of [1]. I > >> also have an industry contact (llvm/clang committer) who's willing to > >> help me on that side of things. One question I have about this is, how > > It would be most helpful if your contact would be willing to sign-up > > in Google Melange as a mentor for RTEMS Project. Please have him/her > > contact me directly for any clarifications. > +1 >
I've sent a request on Melange. I'm mostly familiar with the llvm backend work, but I think I know (or can find out) enough about Clang to help Charith with his work (if he gets selected, of course). Cheers, - Asiri > >> do we define a success measure for this project? I mean, RTEMS seem to > >> already compile with Clang with some local patches [1], but how do we > > Somewhat true, but I believe there are problems with using clang that > > have to do with the pervasive use of gcc spec files. A pre-requisite > > task may be to get the spec files completely eliminated, which there > > is an ongoing effort to do with the "waf branch" of RTEMS [1ing tghe]. > I am suspicious that most of what is in the specs files is obsolete and > already > taken into account inside gcc by our rtems specific tweaks. GCC spec way > extension is a way to accomplish things that can be done inside GCC but > without modifying GCC source. The specs use predates us having many > gcc tweaks. > > The short version is that a careful review may significantly reduce them. > > Also I have long had the idea that adding an option for an rtems bsp > to gcc and clang could eliminate some needs also. The -B option is > mostly to set an include and lib path to get the BSP. > > Random core dump of thoughts of unsure value. > > I think it makes the most sense to work from the waf branch and try to > > help push it forward. > +1 > >> evaluate whether the resulting binary is in good shape? should I also > >> be thinking of some test-plan as part of the project? Secondly, will > > RTEMS has an extensive test-suite [2], and you should be prepared to > > run it before/after. We have a tool that helps with automation [3]. > > > >> it be OK if I fork off clang in github and maintain the patches there? > >> > > Yes, we prefer for gsoc development to be done on github. > > > >> I haven't yet tried out the RTEMS Eclipse plugin (on my TODO list), > >> but I have an interest in learning Eclipse plugin development. I > >> suppose the objectives of this project would be implement as much as > >> possible in the TODO list of [2]? > >> > > Yes, but some of those may be obsolete. Perhaps users will chime in > > about what they would like to see in it. > Agreed. And suggesting Eclipse capabilities that are useful is welcomed. > >> Many thanks for your comments. > >> > >> - Charith > >> > >> PS: "Hello World" exercise attached herewith. > > Confirmed, thanks. Feel free to add yourself to the "Tracking Table" for > 2015. > > > > [1] https://git.rtems.org/amar/waf.git/ > > [2] https://git.rtems.org/rtems/tree/testsuites > > [3] https://git.rtems.org/rtems-tools/tree/tester > > > > Gedare > > > >> [1] https://devel.rtems.org/wiki/Projects/CLANG > >> [2] https://devel.rtems.org/wiki/Developer/Eclipse/Information > >> [3] https://devel.rtems.org/wiki/GSoC/GettingStarted > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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 > > -- > Joel Sherrill, Ph.D. Director of Research & Development > joel.sherr...@oarcorp.com On-Line Applications Research > Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS Huntsville AL 35805 > Support Available (256) 722-9985 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
