[PATCH] Add support for ELF notes

[Chris Johns]

On 28/3/2023 6:20 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 28.03.23 09:03, Chris Johns wrote:
>> On 28/3/2023 5:48 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>> On 25.03.23 00:39, Chris Johns wrote:
>>>> On 24/3/2023 7:32 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>>>> On 23.03.23 20:07, Chris Johns wrote:
>>>>>> On 24/3/2023 3:57 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>>>>>> On 23.03.23 17:52, Will wrote:
>>>>>>>> Great idea to store this information in the executable itself. Does this
>>>>>>>> need
>>>>>>>> a RTEMS_TEST_STATE_LINK_ONLY test state or something similar for
>>>>>>>> minimum.exe?
>>>>>>> With the notes you can build the test. The test runner would look at the
>>>>>>> notes
>>>>>>> and then decide if it makes sense to run the test or not. It could still
>>>>>>> run the
>>>>>>> minimum.exe and see if it terminates.
>>>>>> I welcome notes support. Thanks for adding it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How will we control and manage the notes we support?
>>>>> In the new elfnote.h header file there are defines for the note type
>>>>> (domain-specific integer).
>>>> Great.
>>>>
>>>>>> Should we document the top level notes domains (?) with some we control and
>>>>>> restrict and others users can use? For example `note.rtems.test`,
>>>>>> `note.rtems.kernel`, `note.rtems.bsp`, and `note.rtems.user`?
>>>>> The section name doesn't matter. You can divide the number space of the note
>>>>> type for this.
>>>> Does this mean we define the numbers or number ranges or is it left open? I am
>>>> not sure I am following this bit.
>>> The patch has this:
>>>
>>> #define ELF_NOTE_RTEMS_TYPE( _index ) ( ( _index ) + 0x10000 )
>>>
>>> We basically have 32-bits available. We could also use something like this:
>>>
>>> #define ELF_NOTE_RTEMS_BASE_TYPE( _index ) ( ( _index ) + 0x10000000 )
>>>
>>> #define ELF_NOTE_RTEMS_TEST_TYPE( _index ) ( ( _index ) + 0x20000000 )
>>>
>>> #define ELF_NOTE_RTEMS_USER_TYPE( _index ) ( ( _index ) + 0x30000000 )
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>> Nice.
> 
> Maybe we should also encode the data type here, for example:
> 
> #define ELF_NOTE_DATA_TYPE_BOOL 0
> #define ELF_NOTE_DATA_TYPE_INT8 1
> #define ELF_NOTE_DATA_TYPE_UINT8 2
> #define ELF_NOTE_DATA_TYPE_INT16 3
> #define ELF_NOTE_DATA_TYPE_UINT16 4
> #define ELF_NOTE_DATA_TYPE_INT32 5
> #define ELF_NOTE_DATA_TYPE_UINT32 6
> #define ELF_NOTE_DATA_TYPE_INT64 7
> #define ELF_NOTE_DATA_TYPE_UINT64 8
> #define ELF_NOTE_DATA_TYPE_FLOAT32 9
> #define ELF_NOTE_DATA_TYPE_FLOAT32 10
> #define ELF_NOTE_DATA_TYPE_FLOAT64 11
> #define ELF_NOTE_DATA_TYPE_FLOAT64 12
> #define ELF_NOTE_DATA_TYPE_STRING 13
> #define ELF_NOTE_DATA_TYPE_BINARY 14
> 
> #define ELF_NOTE_RTEMS_BASE_TYPE( _data_type, _index ) \
>   ( ( ( _data_type ) << 28 ) | ( ( _index ) + 0x1000000 ) )
> 
> This could be used by the host tool to more easily produce the right JSON data.
> 

Good idea. I cannot think of anything else as scoping would tend to reduce to a
new type.

Chris