Re: GSoC 2020: Final Report (Beagle BSP: Add FDT based initialization)

Hello Niteesh, On 31/08/2020 08:23, Niteesh G. S. wrote: > Hello, > > I have submitted the final eval. > > Thank you, everyone, for all the support throughout the project. Thank you for your work during GSoC 2020. > Though I couldn't > get any of my patches merged. I'm sure we manage to do th

Re: [PATCH 00/16] c-user: Split up chapter files

On 30/08/2020 18:41, Gedare Bloom wrote: On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 10:15 AM Joel Sherrill wrote: On Sun, Aug 30, 2020, 11:02 AM Joel Sherrill wrote: On Sun, Aug 30, 2020, 10:22 AM Gedare Bloom wrote: this is fairly mechanical. My only question is whether it is better to keep the longer nam

Re: [PATCH 3/3] score: Optimize _Objects_Name_to_id_u32()

On 30/08/2020 18:42, Gedare Bloom wrote: On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 2:32 AM Sebastian Huber wrote: Remove the superfluous invalid name check since the object creation directives ensure that objects with such a name cannot exist. Also Should it instead be a (debug) assert? finding an object w

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

On 31/08/2020 02:34, Chris Johns wrote: On 31/8/20 12:49 am, Sebastian Huber wrote: On 22/08/2020 09:49, Chris Johns wrote: 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 bu

Re: GSoC 2020: Final Report (Beagle BSP: Add FDT based initialization)

Hello, I have submitted the final eval. Thank you, everyone, for all the support throughout the project. Though I couldn't get any of my patches merged. I expect to spend a lot of time post-GSoC to get the work merged and contribute even more :). Thanks, Niteesh. On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 8:46 PM

[PATCH v2] tester: Change to a simpler TFTP server

Hello, The v2 patch has changed the template to a slightly modified version of the one in the enginneering manual. The code has been yapf and pylint checked. Chris ___ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: [PATCH 00/16] c-user: Split up chapter files

On 31/8/20 2:41 am, Gedare Bloom wrote: > On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 10:15 AM Joel Sherrill wrote: >> On Sun, Aug 30, 2020, 11:02 AM Joel Sherrill wrote: >>> On Sun, Aug 30, 2020, 10:22 AM Gedare Bloom wrote: this is fairly mechanical. My only question is whether it is better to keep

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

On 31/8/20 12:49 am, Sebastian Huber wrote: > On 22/08/2020 09:49, Chris Johns wrote: > >> 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 won

Re: [PATCH] tester: Change to a simpler TFTP server

On 28/8/20 1:44 am, Gedare Bloom wrote: > https://docs.rtems.org/branches/master/eng/coding-file-hdr.html#python-file-template I have reviewed the templates and I will post some minor changes. The Python one should change ... # File documentation block to ... ''Module documentation block''' Th

Error in RISC-V Dynamic loading code

Hello everyone, While testing my confstr patch on RISCV i received this error. Error Log : make[5]: Entering directory '/home/eshan/development/rtems/kernel/rv32imac/riscv-rtems6/c/rv32imac/testsuites/libtests' rtems-ld -r /home/eshan/development/rtems/kernel/rv32imac/riscv-rtems6/c/rv32imac \ -

Re: [PATCH 3/3] score: Optimize _Objects_Name_to_id_u32()

On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 2:32 AM Sebastian Huber wrote: > > Remove the superfluous invalid name check since the object creation > directives ensure that objects with such a name cannot exist. Also Should it instead be a (debug) assert? > finding an object with such a name would be no catastrophy

Re: [PATCH 00/16] c-user: Split up chapter files

On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 10:15 AM Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > > On Sun, Aug 30, 2020, 11:02 AM Joel Sherrill wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sun, Aug 30, 2020, 10:22 AM Gedare Bloom wrote: >>> >>> this is fairly mechanical. My only question is whether it is better to >>> keep the longer names for the direct

Re: GSoC 2020 - Final project report

Utkarsh, I'll be happy to continue to guide you in this work, subject to your availability. -Gedare On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 9:25 AM Utkarsh Rai wrote: > > Thank you for your kind guidance throughout the GSoC period. My work with > this project through is not complete and I hope to get it final

Re: [PATCH 00/16] c-user: Split up chapter files

On Sun, Aug 30, 2020, 11:02 AM Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > On Sun, Aug 30, 2020, 10:22 AM Gedare Bloom wrote: > >> this is fairly mechanical. My only question is whether it is better to >> keep the longer names for the directory. like... timer_manager/ >> instead of timer/ or to avoid abbreviati

Re: GSoC 2020 - Final project report

Thank you for your kind guidance throughout the GSoC period. My work with this project through is not complete and I hope to get it finally merged upstream and keep poking around even when that is done :). On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 8:46 PM Gedare Bloom wrote: > Looks great > > On Sun, Aug 30, 2020

Re: [PATCH 00/16] c-user: Split up chapter files

this is fairly mechanical. My only question is whether it is better to keep the longer names for the directory. like... timer_manager/ instead of timer/ or to avoid abbreviations like rate_monotonic/ instead of ratemon/ There are two decisions here: whether or not to say manager in a directory, a

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

On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 8:50 AM Sebastian Huber wrote: > > On 22/08/2020 09:49, Chris Johns wrote: > > > 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

Re: GSoC 2020 - Final project report

Looks great On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 4:55 AM Utkarsh Rai wrote: > > I have updated my post with the help of all of your suggestions. As @Niteesh > G. S. said, sorry to disturb you on a weekend but please take a look. > > On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 6:03 PM Utkarsh Rai wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sat, Aug

Re: GSoC 2020: Final Report (Beagle BSP: Add FDT based initialization)

looks great On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 6:55 AM Christian Mauderer wrote: > > On 30/08/2020 14:38, Niteesh G. S. wrote: > > Hello, > > > > On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 4:12 PM Christian Mauderer > > wrote: > > > > Hello Niteesh, > > > > On 30/08/2020 08:58, Niteesh G. S

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

On 22/08/2020 09:49, Chris Johns wrote: 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 t

Re: GSoC 2020: Final Report (Beagle BSP: Add FDT based initialization)

On 30/08/2020 14:38, Niteesh G. S. wrote: > Hello, > > On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 4:12 PM Christian Mauderer > wrote: > > Hello Niteesh, > > On 30/08/2020 08:58, Niteesh G. S. wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I have updated the blog to contain the links to t

Re: GSoC 2020: Final Report (Beagle BSP: Add FDT based initialization)

Hello, On Sun, Aug 30, 2020 at 4:12 PM Christian Mauderer wrote: > Hello Niteesh, > > On 30/08/2020 08:58, Niteesh G. S. wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I have updated the blog to contain the links to the commits > > instead of the branches. Please have a look again. > > https://gs-niteesh.github.io/f

Re: GSoC 2020 - Final project report

I have updated my post with the help of all of your suggestions. As @Niteesh G. S. said, sorry to disturb you on a weekend but please take a look. On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 6:03 PM Utkarsh Rai wrote: > > > On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 3:59 PM Hesham Almatary < > hesham.almat...@cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote: >

Re: GSoC 2020: Final Report (Beagle BSP: Add FDT based initialization)

Hello Niteesh, On 30/08/2020 08:58, Niteesh G. S. wrote: > Hello, > > I have updated the blog to contain the links to the commits > instead of the branches. Please have a look again. > https://gs-niteesh.github.io/finalreport/ From my point of view, it looks good now. You missed the commit with