Re: [PATCH] bootstrap: Do not create acinlude.m4 files

2018-04-22 Thread Chris Johns
On 23/04/2018 16:13, Sebastian Huber wrote: > On 23/04/18 08:05, Chris Johns wrote: >> On 23/04/2018 15:45, Sebastian Huber wrote: >>> The generation of files which are part of the Git repository should be >>> done by the normal bootstrap script only since this is a RTEMS >>> maintainer job. >> Rea

Re: BSP source re-organization status

2018-04-22 Thread Sebastian Huber
On 23/04/18 08:19, Chris Johns wrote: On 23/04/2018 15:42, Sebastian Huber wrote: On 23/04/18 07:37, Sebastian Huber wrote: On 23/04/18 03:08, Chris Johns wrote: On 20/04/2018 23:23, Sebastian Huber wrote: PS: How can I use brackets { and } in a :file:`...{...}...` directive? Found and test

Re: BSP source re-organization status

2018-04-22 Thread Chris Johns
On 23/04/2018 15:42, Sebastian Huber wrote: > On 23/04/18 07:37, Sebastian Huber wrote: >> On 23/04/18 03:08, Chris Johns wrote: >>> On 20/04/2018 23:23, Sebastian Huber wrote: PS: How can I use brackets { and } in a :file:`...{...}...` directive? >>> Found and tested: >>> >>>   :file:`c/

Re: [PATCH] bootstrap: Do not create acinlude.m4 files

2018-04-22 Thread Sebastian Huber
On 23/04/18 08:05, Chris Johns wrote: On 23/04/2018 15:45, Sebastian Huber wrote: The generation of files which are part of the Git repository should be done by the normal bootstrap script only since this is a RTEMS maintainer job. Really? I am a bit lost by this change. I have never understood

Re: [PATCH] bootstrap: Do not create acinlude.m4 files

2018-04-22 Thread Chris Johns
On 23/04/2018 15:45, Sebastian Huber wrote: > The generation of files which are part of the Git repository should be > done by the normal bootstrap script only since this is a RTEMS > maintainer job. Really? I am a bit lost by this change. I have never understood why acinclude.m4 is in the repo.

[PATCH] bootstrap: Do not create acinlude.m4 files

2018-04-22 Thread Sebastian Huber
The generation of files which are part of the Git repository should be done by the normal bootstrap script only since this is a RTEMS maintainer job. This patch is a part of the BSP source reorganization. Update #3285. --- source-builder/sb/bootstrap.py | 32 1 f

Re: BSP source re-organization status

2018-04-22 Thread Sebastian Huber
On 23/04/18 07:37, Sebastian Huber wrote: On 23/04/18 03:08, Chris Johns wrote: On 20/04/2018 23:23, Sebastian Huber wrote: PS: How can I use brackets { and } in a :file:`...{...}...` directive? Found and tested:   :file:`c/src/lib/libbsp/${{CPU}}/${{BSP}}/startup/bspstart.c` worked. No

Re: BSP source re-organization status

2018-04-22 Thread Sebastian Huber
On 23/04/18 03:08, Chris Johns wrote: On 20/04/2018 23:23, Sebastian Huber wrote: PS: How can I use brackets { and } in a :file:`...{...}...` directive? Found and tested: :file:`c/src/lib/libbsp/${{CPU}}/${{BSP}}/startup/bspstart.c` worked. No, this doesn't work: The BSPs are all under

[PATCH 2/2] bsps: Move make/custom/* files to bsps

2018-04-22 Thread Sebastian Huber
This patch is a part of the BSP source reorganization. Update #3285. --- aclocal/bsp-alias.m4 | 12 +++- aclocal/check-bsps.m4| 12 ++-- aclocal/check-custom-bsp.m4 |

[PATCH 1/2] bsps: Remove AC_CONFIG_SRCDIR()

2018-04-22 Thread Sebastian Huber
This AC_CONFIG_SRCDIR() is just a sanity check in this insane build system. Since all content of c/src/lib/libbsp/@RTEMS_CPU@/@RTEMS_BSP_FAMILY@ is bound to be moved it makes no sense to keep it. This patch is a part of the BSP source reorganization. Update #3285. --- c/src/lib/libbsp/arm/alter

Re: BSP source re-organization status

2018-04-22 Thread Chris Johns
On 20/04/2018 23:23, Sebastian Huber wrote: > > PS: How can I use brackets { and } in a :file:`...{...}...` directive? > Found and tested: :file:`c/src/lib/libbsp/${{CPU}}/${{BSP}}/startup/bspstart.c` worked. Could you please fix in bsp_work_area_initialize() section: - https://git.rtems.or

Re: Unused stm32f4x and stm32f7x files

2018-04-22 Thread Chris Johns
On 23/04/2018 01:25, Sebastian Huber wrote: > > Yes, but both sets are unused. Would you > > 1. remove these unused sources > 2. move them to bsps/arm > > ? It raises a similar question I considered with the removal of the unused gdb stub file in the previous round of changes. The answer I came

Re: Unused stm32f4x and stm32f7x files

2018-04-22 Thread Sebastian Huber
- Am 22. Apr 2018 um 16:54 schrieb joel j...@rtems.org: > On Sun, Apr 22, 2018, 9:41 AM Sebastian Huber < > sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > >> >> - Joel Sherrill schrieb: >> > On Sun, Apr 22, 2018, 8:48 AM Sebastian Huber < >> > sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: >>

Re: Unused stm32f4x and stm32f7x files

2018-04-22 Thread Joel Sherrill
On Sun, Apr 22, 2018, 9:41 AM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > > - Joel Sherrill schrieb: > > On Sun, Apr 22, 2018, 8:48 AM Sebastian Huber < > > sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > we have a lot of unused 3rd party source code

Re: Unused stm32f4x and stm32f7x files

2018-04-22 Thread Sebastian Huber
- Joel Sherrill schrieb: > On Sun, Apr 22, 2018, 8:48 AM Sebastian Huber < > sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > we have a lot of unused 3rd party source code in: > > > > c/src/lib/libbsp/arm/stm32f4x > > c/src/lib/libbsp/arm/stm32f7x > > > > This code is for BSPs

Re: Unused stm32f4x and stm32f7x files

2018-04-22 Thread Joel Sherrill
On Sun, Apr 22, 2018, 8:48 AM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > Hello, > > we have a lot of unused 3rd party source code in: > > c/src/lib/libbsp/arm/stm32f4x > c/src/lib/libbsp/arm/stm32f7x > > This code is for BSPs that never made it into the tree. For the BSP source

Unused stm32f4x and stm32f7x files

2018-04-22 Thread Sebastian Huber
Hello, we have a lot of unused 3rd party source code in: c/src/lib/libbsp/arm/stm32f4x c/src/lib/libbsp/arm/stm32f7x This code is for BSPs that never made it into the tree. For the BSP source re-organization, should I: 1. remove these unused sources 2. move them to bsps/arm ? -- Sebastian

Re: sp36?

2018-04-22 Thread Gedare Bloom
On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 2:25 PM, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > On Sat, Apr 21, 2018, 12:22 PM Gedare Bloom wrote: >> >> I don't think this test is valid. It should be removed. >> >> Justification: It tests the (never really working) strict order mutex >> option. That option doesn't exist, and we tes