On 22/10/15 07:45, Chris Johns wrote:
On 22/10/2015 4:41 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>
>If you use C11, C++11, libgomp or libbsd synchronization objects, then
>the storage space for them is provided by the user and not the workspace.
>
Typically drivers in BSPs have used documented APIs. Is th
On 22/10/2015 4:45 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>
>
> On 21/10/15 16:23, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>> Did you also commit this to 4.11 branch?
>
> I didn't commit anything so far.
>
>>
>> Does it apply to the 4.10 branch?
>
> Yes, see corresponding ticket.
>
Ok for 4.10 and 4.11.
Thanks
Chris
___
On 21/10/15 16:23, Joel Sherrill wrote:
Did you also commit this to 4.11 branch?
I didn't commit anything so far.
Does it apply to the 4.10 branch?
Yes, see corresponding ticket.
--
Sebastian Huber, embedded brains GmbH
Address : Dornierstr. 4, D-82178 Puchheim, Germany
Phone : +49
On 22/10/2015 4:41 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>
> If you use C11, C++11, libgomp or libbsd synchronization objects, then
> the storage space for them is provided by the user and not the workspace.
>
Typically drivers in BSPs have used documented APIs. Is this approach
and support documented and
On 22/10/15 07:37, Chris Johns wrote:
On 22/10/2015 4:33 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>
>
>On 21/10/15 21:53, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
>>Hi Devel,
>>
>>I looked for a while, but couldn't find a way to specify what
>>resources (semaphores, tasks, etc) a BSP requires for an empty project
>>(empty I
On 21/10/15 15:48, Jay Doyle wrote:
On 10/21/2015 09:35 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 21/10/15 15:08, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
On 10/21/2015 09:00 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 21/10/15 14:56, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
On 10/21/2015 08:24 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 21/10/15 14:13,
On 22/10/2015 4:33 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>
>
> On 21/10/15 21:53, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
>> Hi Devel,
>>
>> I looked for a while, but couldn't find a way to specify what
>> resources (semaphores, tasks, etc) a BSP requires for an empty project
>> (empty Init function).
>
> There is no usefu
On 21/10/15 21:53, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
Hi Devel,
I looked for a while, but couldn't find a way to specify what
resources (semaphores, tasks, etc) a BSP requires for an empty project
(empty Init function).
There is no useful support for this and this is a constant source of
problems.
On 21/10/15 23:02, Joel Sherrill wrote:
==
NIOS2
==
Missing needed atomic operations.
nios2-rtems4.11-g++ -B../../../../../nios2_iss/lib/ -specs bsp_specs
-qrtems -mno-hw-mul -mno-hw-div
On 22/10/2015 1:09 am, Gedare Bloom wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 2:07 AM, Sebastian Huber
> wrote:
>> On 21/10/15 06:15, Chris Johns wrote:
>>>
>>> On 20/10/2015 9:10 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 20/10/15 00:46, Chris Johns wrote:
> [...]
>>>
>>> It is easy to add things like the FD
Hi,
That's mainly because the RSB is fetching an upstream gcc-4.8.3
version and it applies my old patch there. I suggested to temporarily
use the current or1k up-to-date repos from github (like Epiphany
tools), which incorporate our RTEMS stuff, and are synced with gcc-5x
version. FWIW Christian t
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 6:02 PM, Joel Sherrill
wrote:
>
>
> On 10/21/2015 3:52 PM, Daniel Gutson wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 3:41 PM, Joel Sherrill
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> lm32, moxie, and nios2 all have generic issues with C++ applications
>>> which indicate C++ is not really suppo
Sorry.. forgot the or1k:
or1k has its own special gcc and (maybe) newlib version.
They are likely out of sync enough to miss the new locking
support.
or1k-rtems4.11-gcc -B../../../../../generic_or1k/lib/ -specs bsp_specs -qrtems
-DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I.
-I../../../../../../../rtems/c/src/../../test
On 10/21/2015 3:52 PM, Daniel Gutson wrote:
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 3:41 PM, Joel Sherrill
wrote:
Hi
lm32, moxie, and nios2 all have generic issues with C++ applications
which indicate C++ is not really supported by gcc for these targets.
Could you please provide more information/details a
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 3:41 PM, Joel Sherrill
wrote:
> Hi
>
> lm32, moxie, and nios2 all have generic issues with C++ applications
> which indicate C++ is not really supported by gcc for these targets.
Could you please provide more information/details about the error and messages?
What does "C++
Let me clarify. I don't think I explained my predicament very well.
None of the tests will run because the base application for our BSP requires resources that
aren't available.
On the application side we're fine.
We have a couple of applications running correctly, by specifying configuratio
On 10/21/2015 2:53 PM, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
Hi Devel,
I looked for a while, but couldn't find a way to specify what resources
(semaphores, tasks,
etc) a BSP requires for an empty project (empty Init function).
I took a look at this page:
https://docs.rtems.org/doc-current/share/rtems/html/
Please file a ticket on the off set of tests installing. It
definitely is clearly something that needs a decision so
we can make them consistent.
I am guessing that we not install any except maybe the samples.
On 10/21/2015 2:48 PM, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
Thanks Joel, that pushed me in the ri
Hi Devel,
I looked for a while, but couldn't find a way to specify what resources (semaphores, tasks,
etc) a BSP requires for an empty project (empty Init function).
I took a look at this page:
https://docs.rtems.org/doc-current/share/rtems/html/bsp_howto/Initialization-Code-The-RTEMS-Configu
Thanks Joel, that pushed me in the right direction.
All the missing tests where living in the build tree, not the install tree.
I've now gotten to the point where none of the tests run, but that's another problem for
another email.
On 10/21/2015 01:57 PM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
On 10/21/2015
Hi
I think the or1k tools are out of sync with RTEMS now.
or1k-rtems4.11-gcc -B../../../../../generic_or1k/lib/ -specs bsp_specs -qrtems
-O2 -O0 -g -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wimplicit-function-declaration
-Wstrict-prototypes -Wnested-externs-O2 -o hello.exe init.o
/data/home/joel/rtems
Hi
lm32, moxie, and nios2 all have generic issues with C++ applications
which indicate C++ is not really supported by gcc for these targets.
Would it be OK to disable C++ for those targets?
--joel
___
devel mailing list
devel@rtems.org
http://lists.rt
On 10/21/2015 12:30 PM, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
Hi All,
I'm trying to run the RTEMS tests for our new BSP. I've managed to get close,
but am missing
something. In general, I'm trying to figure out how the build system decides
what tests to build.
Below is a bunch of information about what I'
Hi All,
I'm trying to run the RTEMS tests for our new BSP. I've managed to get close, but am missing
something. In general, I'm trying to figure out how the build system decides what tests to build.
Below is a bunch of information about what I've tried. It might be irrelevant, so if there is
I haven't actually looked at every file individually, but AFIK yes.
Isaac
On 10/21/2015 11:55 AM, Gedare Bloom wrote:
Isaac,
Is all the code attached licensed under a 2/3-bsd?
Gedare
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 4:54 PM, Joel Sherrill
wrote:
On 10/14/2015 3:35 PM, Gedare Bloom wrote:
I don'
Isaac,
Is all the code attached licensed under a 2/3-bsd?
Gedare
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 4:54 PM, Joel Sherrill
wrote:
>
>
> On 10/14/2015 3:35 PM, Gedare Bloom wrote:
>>
>> I don't have a problem on the surface of it, but can we get a clear
>> statement of the licensing for the included code?
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 12:02 AM, Gedare Bloom wrote:
> A ticket would be preferred. I didn't notice the attachment. Can you
> please (1) make a ticket, (2) close it in the commit message, and (3)
> re-send your patch.
>
> Ben, if you get around to it, please commit the revised patch when it
> com
On 10/21/2015 9:09 AM, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
On 10/21/2015 09:58 AM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
On 10/21/2015 8:35 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 21/10/15 15:08, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
On 10/21/2015 09:00 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 21/10/15 14:56, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
On 10/21/201
Did you also commit this to 4.11 branch?
Does it apply to the 4.10 branch?
On 10/21/2015 2:56 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
Close #2433.
---
cpukit/libfs/src/rfs/rtems-rfs-rtems.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/cpukit/libfs/src/rfs/rtems-rfs-rtems.c
b/cpukit/libfs/src/rf
Forwarded Message
Subject:Re: Random lwIP Crashes in _POSIX_Mutex_Lock_support()
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 09:48:42 -0400
From: Jay Doyle
To: Sebastian Huber
On 10/21/2015 09:35 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 21/10/15 15:08, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
On 10/
On 10/21/2015 12:41 AM, Thomas Dörfler wrote:
I have discussed dropping BSPs from support and from a technical point I
fully agree that this must be done. We should have some sort of active
BSPs which are regularily tested.
On the other hand, RTEMS can only live and grow, if it is attrative
en
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 2:07 AM, Sebastian Huber
wrote:
> On 21/10/15 06:15, Chris Johns wrote:
>>
>> On 20/10/2015 9:10 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>>
>>> On 20/10/15 00:46, Chris Johns wrote:
[...]
>>
>> It is easy to add things like the FDT support to the shared BSP tree and
>> if you look over
On 10/21/2015 09:58 AM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
On 10/21/2015 8:35 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 21/10/15 15:08, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
On 10/21/2015 09:00 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 21/10/15 14:56, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
On 10/21/2015 08:24 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 21/10/15
On 10/21/2015 8:35 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 21/10/15 15:08, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
On 10/21/2015 09:00 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 21/10/15 14:56, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
On 10/21/2015 08:24 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 21/10/15 14:13, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
Thanks for the r
On 21/10/15 15:35, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 21/10/15 15:08, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
On 10/21/2015 09:00 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 21/10/15 14:56, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
On 10/21/2015 08:24 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 21/10/15 14:13, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
Thanks for the reply
On 21/10/15 15:08, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
On 10/21/2015 09:00 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 21/10/15 14:56, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
On 10/21/2015 08:24 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 21/10/15 14:13, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
Thanks for the reply.
On 10/21/2015 01:50 AM, Sebastian Huber wr
On 10/21/2015 09:00 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 21/10/15 14:56, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
On 10/21/2015 08:24 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 21/10/15 14:13, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
Thanks for the reply.
On 10/21/2015 01:50 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 20/10/15 16:02, Isaac Gutekunst wr
On 21/10/15 14:56, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
On 10/21/2015 08:24 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 21/10/15 14:13, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
Thanks for the reply.
On 10/21/2015 01:50 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 20/10/15 16:02, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
[...]
As far as I can tell this would on
On 10/21/2015 08:24 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 21/10/15 14:13, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
Thanks for the reply.
On 10/21/2015 01:50 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 20/10/15 16:02, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
[...]
As far as I can tell this would only occur if the caller of pthread_mutex_loc
On 21/10/15 14:13, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
Thanks for the reply.
On 10/21/2015 01:50 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 20/10/15 16:02, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
[...]
As far as I can tell this would only occur if the caller of
pthread_mutex_lock was in a "bad"
state. I don't believe it is in
Thanks for the reply.
On 10/21/2015 01:50 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 20/10/15 16:02, Isaac Gutekunst wrote:
Hi Devel,
I'm pretty sure this is a devel question, not users.
I'm working with a colleague at Vecna to port lwIP to the STM32F7 BSP we've
developed.
We have a basic HTTP server
Close #2433.
---
cpukit/libfs/src/rfs/rtems-rfs-rtems.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/cpukit/libfs/src/rfs/rtems-rfs-rtems.c
b/cpukit/libfs/src/rfs/rtems-rfs-rtems.c
index 999dfb3..a0ade04 100644
--- a/cpukit/libfs/src/rfs/rtems-rfs-rtems.c
+++ b/cpukit/libfs/src/rfs/rtems
42 matches
Mail list logo
