Re: [PATCH 2/2] c-user: Avoid Sphinx-specifics in appl config

On 06/08/2020 07:46, Sebastian Huber wrote: This helps to generate Doxygen markup from the application configuration option specification items. Update #3994. Please ignore the second patch. I will use another approach do address this issue. ___ dev

[PATCH 2/2] c-user: Avoid Sphinx-specifics in appl config

This helps to generate Doxygen markup from the application configuration option specification items. Update #3994. --- c-user/config/bsp-related.rst | 8 ++-- c-user/config/classic-api.rst | 63 - c-user/config/classic-init-task.rst | 2 +- c-user/config/

[PATCH 1/2] eng: Add application config options how-to

Update #3715. --- eng/req/howto.rst | 118 ++ 1 file changed, 118 insertions(+) diff --git a/eng/req/howto.rst b/eng/req/howto.rst index 9a28427..475794c 100644 --- a/eng/req/howto.rst +++ b/eng/req/howto.rst @@ -34,6 +34,124 @@ environment in your shel

RE: busdma: question about header

Thank you very much Sebastian! -Original Message- From: Sebastian Huber [mailto:sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de] Sent: Mittwoch, 5. August 2020 15:07 To: Moyano Heredia, Victor Gabriel; devel@rtems.org Subject: Re: busdma: question about header Hello Gabriel, this should be fixed now

Re: [PATCH] fix Wunused-function deleting unused static functions in dl_tests

On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 5:52 AM Aschref Ben-Thabet wrote: > > From: Aschref Ben Thabet > > the functions dl_close and dl_call are not needed for this test, > deleting them will avoid the warning of Wunused-function. > --- > testsuites/libtests/dl10/dl-load.c | 21 - > 1 file

Re: GSoC 2020: OFW Import To RTEMS License Issue

On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 3:47 PM Gedare Bloom wrote: > On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 12:38 PM Christian Mauderer > wrote: > > > > I think for this one we can only hope that the original author agrees to > > a re-licensing. Otherwise it is only possible to add a replacement. > > > > I suggest starting to

Re: [PATCH] smpschededf02: Document reset() function

I would. Thank you. On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 10:24 AM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > On 04/08/2020 16:23, Richi Dubey wrote: > > Thanks. > > > > So for the code: > > > --

Re: [PATCH] score: Document _Scheduler_Try_to_schedule_node()

> > + * @retval SCHEDULER_TRY_TO_SCHEDULE_DO_BLOCK The node shall be blocked. > This > + * action is returned, if the owner thread is already scheduled by > another > + * scheduler. When would this happen? When a thread is getting help from a different processor that is using a different sched

Re: Doubt in scheduler SMP function _Scheduler_SMP_Schedule_highest_ready

Thank you for the clarification. On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 1:00 PM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > On 04/08/2020 17:57, Gedare Bloom wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 8:14 AM Richi Dubey wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> I have a quick doubt about the logic in the else part o

Re: [PATCH] score: Document _Scheduler_Try_to_schedule_node()

Thanks for the explanation. I do not understand it right now, but I'm hoping it'd make sense some time in the future :p On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 12:50 PM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > --- > cpukit/include/rtems/score/schedulerimpl.h | 44 +- > 1

Re: busdma: question about header

Hello Gabriel, this should be fixed now. -- Sebastian Huber, embedded brains GmbH Address : Dornierstr. 4, D-82178 Puchheim, Germany Phone : +49 89 189 47 41-16 Fax : +49 89 189 47 41-09 E-Mail : sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de PGP : Public key available on request. Diese Nachric

busdma: question about header

Hello, After one of the last changes on the file rtems-kernel-bus-dma.c, commit 5e3780023 on branch 6-freebsd-12, it is not possible to compile the tests for i386 because is not found. How is the best way to solve this issue? Adding an #ifndef __i386__? Something like this: #ifndef __i386__

[PATCH] eng: Refer to the rtems-central repository

Close #4043. --- eng/req/howto.rst | 13 ++--- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/eng/req/howto.rst b/eng/req/howto.rst index 9a28427..c539563 100644 --- a/eng/req/howto.rst +++ b/eng/req/howto.rst @@ -8,14 +8,13 @@ How-To Getting Started --- -The

Re: [PATCH] psxhdrs/strncpy/stpncpy: Fix string turncation warning

These are ok. This code is never executed.and these are reasonable changes. On Wed, Aug 5, 2020, 6:54 AM Aschref Ben-Thabet < aschref.ben-tha...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > From: Aschref Ben Thabet > > Since we need to test the strncpy function, using a character array with > a fixed array size

[PATCH] psxhdrs/strncpy/stpncpy: Fix string turncation warning

From: Aschref Ben Thabet Since we need to test the strncpy function, using a character array with a fixed array size in this case in place of character pointer can avoid the string turncation warning. --- testsuites/psxtests/psxhdrs/string/stpncpy.c | 7 +++ testsuites/psxtests/psxhdrs/strin

[PATCH] fix Wunused-function deleting unused static functions in dl_tests

From: Aschref Ben Thabet the functions dl_close and dl_call are not needed for this test, deleting them will avoid the warning of Wunused-function. --- testsuites/libtests/dl10/dl-load.c | 21 - 1 file changed, 21 deletions(-) diff --git a/testsuites/libtests/dl10/dl-load.c

[PATCH] psxhdrs_strncpy_fix string_turncation_warning

From: Aschref Ben Thabet since we need to test the strncpy function, using a character array with a fixed array size in this case in place of character pointer can avoid the string turncation warning. --- testsuites/psxtests/psxhdrs/string/stpncpy.c | 8 testsuites/psxtests/psxhdrs/stri

Re: [PATCH rtems-libbsd 2/2] wscript: add uninstall command

On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 10:34 AM Chris Johns wrote: > > On 5/8/20 1:52 am, Vijay Kumar Banerjee wrote: > > Hi Chris, > > > > Is this patch OK to push to the master? > > Yes, please push. I am sorry about the slow review. > Thanks for the review. Pushed. > Thanks > Chris __

Re: Doubt in scheduler SMP function _Scheduler_SMP_Schedule_highest_ready

On 04/08/2020 17:57, Gedare Bloom wrote: On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 8:14 AM Richi Dubey wrote: Hi, I have a quick doubt about the logic in the else part of the _Scheduler_SMP_Schedule_highest_ready function. I'll give my understanding. Only Sebastian really understands this stuff;) We get the

[PATCH] score: Document _Scheduler_Try_to_schedule_node()

--- cpukit/include/rtems/score/schedulerimpl.h | 44 +- 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) diff --git a/cpukit/include/rtems/score/schedulerimpl.h b/cpukit/include/rtems/score/schedulerimpl.h index e7fbb8b166..8f5e1ba7b8 100644 --- a/cpukit/include/rtems/score/