CoreMark's primary goals are simplicity and providing a method for
testing only a processor's core features. It is used primarily here as
a performance benchmark.
Built and tested for RISC-V rv64imafdc_medany on QEMU and HW
---
.gitmodules | 3 +++
benchmarks/coremark/coremark |
On Fri, 21 Feb 2020 at 18:16, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>
> Is this being added to rtems-examples?
>
Yes
> Is it clear where this came from (URL) and what version it is per the origin?
>
The submodule has a link to our fork. It's clear it's forked from
eembc/coremark and it has all copyrights+license
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020, 11:27 AM Hesham Almatary
wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Feb 2020 at 17:11, Gedare Bloom wrote:
> >
> > What is the difference between the CTSRD-CHERI fork and the upstream
> Coremark?
> >
> I submitted a pending PR to CoreMark/upstream to add RTEMS support
> [1]. I have more flexbilit
Is this being added to rtems-examples?
Is it clear where this came from (URL) and what version it is per the
origin?
Do all of examples build for you with waf? I tried this week and they all
build with make but not waf?
How do the numbers look?
Except for origin statement, none of this is a rea
On Fri, 21 Feb 2020 at 17:11, Gedare Bloom wrote:
>
> What is the difference between the CTSRD-CHERI fork and the upstream Coremark?
>
I submitted a pending PR to CoreMark/upstream to add RTEMS support
[1]. I have more flexbility and control over the CTSRD-CHERI fork to
push/use
fixess/features mo
What is the difference between the CTSRD-CHERI fork and the upstream Coremark?
It should be made clear in the repo the license of the Coremark (APL
1.0 I believe)
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 10:00 AM Hesham Almatary
wrote:
>
> CoreMark's primary goals are simplicity and providing a method for testin
CoreMark's primary goals are simplicity and providing a method for testing only
a processor's core features.
It is used primarily here as a performance benchmark
Built and tested for RISC-V rv64imafdc_medany on QEMU and HW
---
.gitmodules | 3 +++
benchmarks/coremark/coremark |
