On 24/08/14 11:42, Pavel Pisa wrote:
Hello Sebastian,
On Sunday 24 of August 2014 10:54:15 Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 08/22/2014 10:14 PM, Pavel Pisa wrote:
+RTEMS_INLINE_ROUTINE bool rtems_clock_ticks_before(
+ rtems_interval ticks
+)
+{
+ return ( (int32_t) ticks - (int32_t) _Watchdog_Tic
---
c/src/lib/libcpu/shared/src/cache_manager.c |2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/c/src/lib/libcpu/shared/src/cache_manager.c
b/c/src/lib/libcpu/shared/src/cache_manager.c
index 7dd408f..7ff1166 100644
--- a/c/src/lib/libcpu/shared/src/cache_manager.c
+++ b/c/src/lib/libcpu
> Looks like this function needs a guard on #if
> defined(CPU_INSTRUCTION_CACHE_ALIGNMENT)
Yes, looks like I missed that. I will send a patch.
Daniel C
On 2014-08-22 16:38, Gedare Bloom wrote:
Looks like this function needs a guard on #if
defined(CPU_INSTRUCTION_CACHE_ALIGNMENT)
see rtems_ca
On 24/08/2014 7:59 pm, Pavel Pisa wrote:
Hello Chris,
On Sunday 24 of August 2014 05:33:45 Chris Johns wrote:
On 23/08/2014 1:57 am, Joel Sherrill wrote:
The build failures I reported were with the latest RSB tools
Please pitch in and let's resolve them.
I have a regression build that includ
Hi,
I have configured the rtems-tools and rtems-source-builder repos to send
commit messages to the v...@rtems.org mailing list.
Chris
___
devel mailing list
devel@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On August 24, 2014 7:28:32 AM EDT, Chris Johns wrote:
>On 24/08/2014 6:57 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>> On 08/24/2014 05:02 AM, Chris Johns wrote:
>>>
>>> The calls names make sense from a programming point of view but from
>a
>>> user point of view they are sort of forwards and backwards. For
>
On 24/08/2014 6:57 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 08/24/2014 05:02 AM, Chris Johns wrote:
The calls names make sense from a programming point of view but from a
user point of view they are sort of forwards and backwards. For
example rtems_clock_ticks_later_us is the "the clock tick so many
micro
Hello Sebastian and others,
I have got finally to testing of both lpc40xx_ea_ram
and lpc17xx_ea_ram RTEMS targets on our LX_CPU board
in LPC4088 variant
http://pikron.com/pages/products/cpu_boards/lx_cpu.html
The RTEMS version has been git 66f1ca64c8eda561bc16cb14bd097f4c0778127b
before cache
Hello Chris,
On Sunday 24 of August 2014 05:33:45 Chris Johns wrote:
> On 23/08/2014 1:57 am, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> > The build failures I reported were with the latest RSB tools
> > Please pitch in and let's resolve them.
>
> I have a regression build that includes building all BSPs using ...
>
Hello Sebastian,
On Sunday 24 of August 2014 10:54:15 Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 08/22/2014 10:14 PM, Pavel Pisa wrote:
> >>> +RTEMS_INLINE_ROUTINE bool rtems_clock_ticks_before(
> >>>
> >>> > >+ rtems_interval ticks
> >>> > >+)
> >>> > >+{
> >>> > >+ return ( (int32_t) ticks - (int32_t) _Watch
On 08/24/2014 05:02 AM, Chris Johns wrote:
On 23/08/2014 1:12 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
Add rtems_clock_ticks_later(), rtems_clock_ticks_later_us() and
rtems_clock_ticks_later_us().
FIXME: Patch is incomplete. Documentation and tests are missing. Just
for API review.
---
cpukit/rtems/inclu
On 08/22/2014 10:14 PM, Pavel Pisa wrote:
+RTEMS_INLINE_ROUTINE bool rtems_clock_ticks_before(
> >+ rtems_interval ticks
> >+)
> >+{
> >+ return ( (int32_t) ticks - (int32_t) _Watchdog_Ticks_since_boot ) > 0;
>
>Why not just return _Watchdog_Ticks_since_boot < ticks;
Yes, this doesn't work i
12 matches
Mail list logo
