[PATCH 00/26] leon: various fixes and TN0018 errata workaround

Joel Sherrill joel at rtems.org
Mon Mar 8 15:43:51 UTC 2021

On Sun, Mar 7, 2021 at 9:51 AM Daniel Hellstrom <daniel at gaisler.com> wrote:

> On 2020-09-23 17:05, Gedare Bloom wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 4:34 AM Daniel Hellstrom <daniel at gaisler.com> <daniel at gaisler.com> wrote:
> Hi Sebastian,
> Thanks for asking and sorry for dropping the ball on these.
> The status is that two needs updating (BSD license for new CAN files and
> the last tn0018 patch needs some redesign based on feedback) and the
> others are accepted for master. I've sent an response on the tn0018
> errata patch just now. I would like to push them on the 5 and master
> branches. To get them onto 5, should  I create a ticket for the whole
> patch set? I will try getting this done next next couple of days, and
> have a look at you patches too, thanks!
> It would be good to separate them logically to the TN-0018 errata
> fixes vs the CAN/grlib improvements. The concern for pushing them to 5
> is that they touch core sparc files, but since you guys are releasing
> them this way in RCC I'm also comfortable with it. I didn't see any
> changes outside the sparc (since currently grlib is sparc-specific
> too). We'll need those tickets to help us with the dot-release notes.
> Sorry for my very late response. There were some more updates on a few of
> the patches based on the review comments which has been addressed. I have
> now created tickets for all of them which are referenced from the patches,
> so I will go ahead and push them for the 5-branch (the posted patches
> targeted 5).

I agree with Gedare on trusting the patches. My only concern is making sure
proper tickets are filed. A couple of guidelines may help decide how many
tickets and for what.

The first thing to remember is that tickets are automatically processed
into release notes. If it is important enough to show up in a release note,
file a ticket. I have been prodding Ryan to file tickets for the Coverity
issues because I think they should be in release notes.

For 5, any changes should have tickets. This is a long standing rule for
release branches.

> However, I will wait with the TN-0018 before I get an acknowledge for that
> one. I updated the its ticket with links to the GCC patch that has now been
> accepted into upstreams GCC (GCC-10 stable and master). The TN0018 patch is
> not enabled if the GCC-patch is not included in the toolchain, so I believe
> it should be ok to push, even before RSB is updated?

It sounds like it will be ok.

What happens with TN0018 on the 5 branch where we are using older tools?

>     https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/4155
> Next step for me is to add some configurations for the new build system
> before I can push them to RTEMS/master.

Thanks for submitting all these. Is this going to clean your queue?


> Thanks,
> /Daniel
> Kind Regards,
> Daniel
> On 2020-09-18 10:03, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> Hallo Daniel,
> what are your plans with respect to this patch set?
> Please also have a look at:
> https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/2020-September/062176.html
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing listdevel at rtems.orghttp://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel at rtems.org
> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20210308/dcb779c1/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the devel mailing list