Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] Strict thread-stack isolation

On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 11:32 PM Gedare Bloom wrote: > I have some comments below. I'm not that happy with the lack of design > discussion during the iteration of this code. While it is a little > easier to critique the code, it is also a bit wasteful because I have > to also comment on stylistic

Re: [GSoC 2020]: Need help in writing sed alternative in Python for RSB recipes

[Good news and Update]: Thank you so much Chris! Your advice to search for macros using --trace solved the problem of hard coding! It took two complete days to figure out this beautiful thing but it is every worth it. Now the user has to just enter the below command and it will make things work:

Re: Pre release version: Strong APA Scheduler

v1 should point to the link: https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/2020-July/060645.html On Sun, Aug 23, 2020 at 3:27 AM Richi Dubey wrote: > Hi, > > I am really excited to annonunce the pre-release verion of Strong APA > Scheduer for RTEMS that we've been working so hard for! > > The document

Pre release version: Strong APA Scheduler

Hi, I am really excited to annonunce the pre-release verion of Strong APA Scheduer for RTEMS that we've been working so hard for! The documentation for the scheduler is now live at : https://richidubey.github.io/Strong-APA-Documentation/html/ To understand how the code works, please go through t

[PATCH] Pre Release: Strong APA

--- cpukit/include/rtems/scheduler.h | 6 +- .../include/rtems/score/schedulerstrongapa.h | 284 -- cpukit/score/src/schedulerstrongapa.c | 920 ++ 3 files changed, 908 insertions(+), 302 deletions(-) diff --git a/cpukit/include/rtems/scheduler.h b/cpuk

Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] Thread stack sharing

On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 9:19 AM Utkarsh Rai wrote: > > For the design details of the stack sharing mechanism please refer to the > following post - > https://gsoc2020memoryprotection.blogspot.com/2020/08/high-level-design-and-implementation-of.html > --- > cpukit/posix/src/mmap.c

Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] Strict thread-stack isolation

I have some comments below. I'm not that happy with the lack of design discussion during the iteration of this code. While it is a little easier to critique the code, it is also a bit wasteful because I have to also comment on stylistic problems, and when some decisions you make while coding end up

Re: [PATCH v2] bsps/shared/ofw: Implement RTEMS OFW interface

Hello, I went through the history of the OF implementation in NetBSD and FreeBSD. I have summarized the things I have found out below. The first OF implementation seems to come from NetBSD this is actually BSD-4 licensed. FreeBSD and also other BSD have used this as the base and improved the API.

[PATCH v4 1/3] Strict thread-stack isolation

- These patches are based on the new build system. - Allocation of page aligned stack has been done through posix_memalign(), which is a hack. --- .../realview-pbx-a9/mmu/bsp-set-mmu-attr.c| 90 + bsps/shared/start/stackalloc.c| 12 +- cpukit/include/rtems/scor

[PATCH v4 2/3] High level configuration option for thread stack protection

-Configurations options are provided by using the new-build system. Refer to https://ftp.rtems.org/pub/rtems/people/sebh/user.pdf, chapter 7,for basic setup and https://ftp.rtems.org/pub/rtems/people/sebh/eng.pdf(chapter 9) for the internals of the build system. --- .../arm/realview-pbx-a9/bs

[PATCH v4 3/3] Thread stack sharing

For the design details of the stack sharing mechanism please refer to the following post - https://gsoc2020memoryprotection.blogspot.com/2020/08/high-level-design-and-implementation-of.html --- cpukit/posix/src/mmap.c | 39 - cpukit/posix/src/shmopen.c

Re: [PATCH v2] bsps/shared/ofw: Implement RTEMS OFW interface

On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 11:26 AM Niteesh G. S. wrote: > > > > On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 9:38 PM Gedare Bloom wrote: >> >> Hi Niteesh, >> >> Can you explain how you developed the new code in a way that ensures >> that we do not have any of the previously 4-BSD licensed code left? > > The FDT impleme

Re: [PATCH 1/1] Adding QEP driver to Beaglebone bsp

On 21/8/20 8:01 pm, James Fitzsimons wrote: > --- > bsps/arm/beagle/headers.am | 2 + > bsps/arm/beagle/include/bsp/bbb-pwm.h | 11 - > bsps/arm/beagle/include/bsp/pwmss.h | 54 +++ > bsps/arm/beagle/include/bsp/qep.h | 331 ++ > bsps/arm/beagle/pwm/pwm

Re: [PATCH 0/1] Adds QEP driver to Beaglebone BSP

Hi James, Thank you for the patch and adding this functionality. On 21/8/20 8:01 pm, James Fitzsimons wrote: > This patch adds driver support for the eQEP (enhanced Quadrature Encoder > Pulse) > module within each of the PWMSS units in the AM335x. The eQEP module is used > for > hardware deco

Re: [PATCH 7/7] rtems: Add rtems_task_build()

On 21/8/20 9:51 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: > In contrast to rtems_task_create() this function creates a task with a > user-provided task storage area. The name is build but it creates a task? I am wondering about rtems_task_create_static or something along this line? > Close #3959. Sorry, I had