Is this working right? Please regenerate a single squashed patch.
Check for git errors (no newline at end of file?)
Just a thought, I'm not sure if it makes sense: Will we eventually
need separate metadata files for each of the 4 kinds of record event
layouts? 32b be, 32b le, 64b be, 64b le? if so, the file name should
probably reflect the options, e.g., metadata-64b-be-record
Gedare
On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 11:21 AM Ravindra Meena <rmeena...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> ---
> misc/ctf/metadata | 5 +++--
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/misc/ctf/metadata b/misc/ctf/metadata
> index 068e4ba..3351575 100644
> --- a/misc/ctf/metadata
> +++ b/misc/ctf/metadata
> @@ -4,10 +4,12 @@ typealias integer { size = 8; align = 8; signed = false; }
> := uint8_t;
> typealias integer { size = 16; align = 8; signed = false; } := uint16_t;
> typealias integer { size = 32; align = 8; signed = false; } := uint32_t;
> typealias integer { size = 64; align = 8; signed = false; } := uint64_t;
> +typealias integer { size = 64; align = 8; signed = false; byte_order=be; }
> := uint64_t_be;
> typealias integer { size = 64; align = 8; signed = false; } := timestamp_t;
>
> /* 1024 events are defined. The events are taking values from 0 to 1023. */
> -typedef enum events_e : uint64_t {
> +
> +typedef enum events_e : uint64_t_be {
> RTEMS_RECORD_EMPTY,
> RTEMS_RECORD_VERSION,
> RTEMS_RECORD_ACCEPT_ENTRY,
> @@ -1056,4 +1058,3 @@ event {
> uint64_t data;
> };
> };
> -
> --
> 2.7.4
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
