[PATCH 1/2] tests: Fix rtems_test_spin_until_next_tick()

This bug surfaced due to sporadic failures in sptimecounter02. Adjust rtems_test_spin_for_ticks() to include the partial tick in the argument value. --- testsuites/support/include/test_support.h | 5 +++-- testsuites/support/src/spin.c | 20 +++- 2 files changed, 10 i

[PATCH 2/2] psxtimes01: Fix sporadic failures

It is not enough to just wait for at least the first clock tick to get non-zero times. In _times() we round down, so the uptime must be greater than or equal to the clock tick interval. We do not know when the timecounter is started during the system initialization. We have to wait until at leas

[PATCH] Simplify _CPU_Counter_difference()

In order to simplify the use of CPU counter values it is beneficial to have monotonic increasing values within the range of the CPU counter ticks data type, e.g. 32-bit unsigned integer. This eases the use of CPU counter timestamps in external tools which do not know the details of the CPU counter

psxhdrs: add POSIX API Signature Compliance Tests for stdio.h File (GCI 2018)

Hi guys, Here is the patch for stdio.h file. Thanks Himanshu From 2fb179b743f7527f5d922c0fd42b8e5306326cd9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Himanshu40 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2018 15:45:23 +0530 Subject: [PATCH] psxhdrs : add POSIX API Signature Compliance Tests for stdio.h File (GCI 2018) --- testsui

[PATCH v2] Simplify _CPU_Counter_difference()

In order to simplify the use of CPU counter values it is beneficial to have monotonic increasing values within the range of the CPU counter ticks data type, e.g. 32-bit unsigned integer. This eases the use of CPU counter timestamps in external tools which do not know the details of the CPU counter

Re: Unstable RTEMS 6 tool chain?

On 04/12/2018 04:37, Chris Johns wrote: On 03/12/2018 17:45, Sebastian Huber wrote: what about adding an unstable RTEMS 6 tool chain to the RSB which is automatically updated weekly? I would like to test the Newlib, Binutils, GCC and GDB head regularly. I could set up a cron job to check out the

Re: Unstable RTEMS 6 tool chain?

On Wed, Dec 5, 2018, 4:55 AM Sebastian Huber < sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de wrote: > On 04/12/2018 04:37, Chris Johns wrote: > > On 03/12/2018 17:45, Sebastian Huber wrote: > >> what about adding an unstable RTEMS 6 tool chain to the RSB which is > >> automatically updated weekly? I would li

[PATCH] eng/coding-doxygen: Fix errors

This work was part of GCI 2018. --- eng/coding-doxygen.rst | 732 + 1 file changed, 370 insertions(+), 362 deletions(-) diff --git a/eng/coding-doxygen.rst b/eng/coding-doxygen.rst index 49c53bb..ee5f693 100644 --- a/eng/coding-doxygen.rst +++ b/eng/coding-

Align the code to one backspace

Hi guys, I just made some minor changes for space and for more tests patch are coming soon. So here is the patch for dirent.h . Thanks Himanshu From 046c1c845d8b8a1f92039d495f8f871005ab8de6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Himanshu40 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2018 20:58:39 +0530 Subject: [PATCH] Align the

psxhdrs: add POSIX API Signature Compliance Tests for stdio.h File (GCI 2018)

Hi guys, Here is the updated patch. Thanks Himanshu From ce60354cd63a4d589a1cf3d379eabfeeecde5af3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Himanshu40 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2018 01:33:13 +0530 Subject: [PATCH] psxhdrs: added POSIX API Signature Compliance Tests for stdio.h File (GCI 2018) --- testsuites/psxt

Re: psxhdrs: add POSIX API Signature Compliance Tests for stdio.h File (GCI 2018)

On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 at 01:39, Himanshu Sekhar Nayak < himanshuwindows...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi guys, > > Here is the updated patch. > > There's warning in getline.c even after defining _POSIX_C_SOURCE > Thanks > Himanshu > ___ > devel mailing list > dev

Re: psxhdrs: add POSIX API Signature Compliance Tests for stdio.h File (GCI 2018)

Vijay Do you still see it with the committed version of the patch? a couple of methods are listed in the section where file names are comments out with tickets beside them. --joel On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 2:26 PM Vijay Kumar Banerjee < vijaykumar9...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 a

Re: psxhdrs: add POSIX API Signature Compliance Tests for stdio.h File (GCI 2018)

On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 at 02:03, Joel Sherrill wrote: > Vijay > > Do you still see it with the committed version of the patch? a couple of > methods are listed in the section where file names are comments out with > tickets beside them. > > I still see the warning in the committed version if I compil

[PATCH] Fix wrong function signatures

From: kaidoho --- linkers/rtems-score-object.ini | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/linkers/rtems-score-object.ini b/linkers/rtems-score-object.ini index b4a977f..1e98a71 100644 --- a/linkers/rtems-score-object.ini +++ b/linkers/rtems-score-object.ini @@ -31,

Re: psxhdrs: add POSIX API Signature Compliance Tests for stdio.h File (GCI 2018)

On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 3:27 PM Vijay Kumar Banerjee < vijaykumar9...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 at 02:03, Joel Sherrill wrote: > >> Vijay >> >> Do you still see it with the committed version of the patch? a couple of >> methods are listed in the section where file names are comm

Re: Unstable RTEMS 6 tool chain?

On 05/12/2018 21:55, Sebastian Huber wrote: > On 04/12/2018 04:37, Chris Johns wrote: >> On 03/12/2018 17:45, Sebastian Huber wrote: >>> what about adding an unstable RTEMS 6 tool chain to the RSB which is >>> automatically updated weekly? I would like to test the Newlib, Binutils, >>> GCC and >>>

Re: [PATCH] Fix wrong function signatures

Pushed. Thanks Chris On 06/12/2018 08:58, kho237...@gmail.com wrote: > From: kaidoho > > --- > linkers/rtems-score-object.ini | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/linkers/rtems-score-object.ini b/linkers/rtems-score-object.ini > index b4a977f..1e98a71 1

Re: Best Home for uncrustify configuration file

On 05/12/2018 17:10, Sebastian Huber wrote: > On 05/12/2018 05:18, Chris Johns wrote: >> On 05/12/2018 14:59, Joel Sherrill wrote: >>> Current location: >>> https://devel.rtems.org/attachment/wiki/Developer/Coding/Conventions/rtems.uncrustify >>> >>> >>> Any thoughts on a better location? The page