Date   
Re: ZEPHYR_TOOLCHAIN_VARIANT=host in docs? (Was: Zephyr SDK 0.10.0-rc2 available)

Marti Bolivar <marti@...>
 

On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 12:42 PM Marc Herbert <marc.herbert@...> wrote:



On 8 Feb 2019, at 08:28, Nashif, Anas <anas.nashif@...> wrote:

Do we make Zephyr 1.14 release with the stable 0.9.5 SDK?
No, Zephyr release is not tied to a toolchain. The SDK was always a one stop for everything you need to build and use zephyr, but you should be able to use any toolchain.
… including no “toolchain" in some cases thanks to ZEPHYR_TOOLCHAIN_VARIANT=host

I noticed ZEPHYR_TOOLCHAIN_VARIANT=host doesn’t seem mentioned in the documentation (I found it in the source). Would a one-liner in the "Getting Started" page be acceptable? I can submit.
I am responsible for this oversight in the documentation. If you
wouldn't mind sending a fix I would be happy to review it.

Thanks.

https://docs.zephyrproject.org/latest/getting_started/index.html?highlight=zephyr_toolchain_variant
https://docs.zephyrproject.org/latest/search.html?q=zephyr_toolchain_variant

Marc




Re: New development boards added to 1.14 #nrf52832 #nrf52840

Carles Cufi
 

Hi Ryan,

 

I will take a look at the PRs and add reviewers.

Feel free to join the TSC call tomorrow to raise awareness and discuss. The release manager for this release is Kumar Gala from  Linaro.

https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/wiki/Zephyr-Committee-and-Working-Group-Meetings#technical-steering-committee-tsc

 

Regards,

 

Carles

 

From: devel@... <devel@...> On Behalf Of Ryan Erickson
Sent: 12 February 2019 17:06
To: devel@...
Subject: [Zephyr-devel] New development boards added to 1.14 #nrf52832 #nrf52840

 

Hello,

I have 2 PRs open to add two new development boards to Zephyr. I would like to see if it is possible to get them added before v1.14 is released.
https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/pull/13274
https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/pull/13325

Each of these boards are VERY closely based on Nordic dev boards so it should be very low risk to get them added.
Who do I need to contact to try and get these PRs tagged for inclusion in 1.14?

Thanks,

Ryan

New development boards added to 1.14 #nrf52832 #nrf52840

Ryan Erickson
 

Hello,

I have 2 PRs open to add two new development boards to Zephyr. I would like to see if it is possible to get them added before v1.14 is released.
https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/pull/13274
https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/pull/13325

Each of these boards are VERY closely based on Nordic dev boards so it should be very low risk to get them added.
Who do I need to contact to try and get these PRs tagged for inclusion in 1.14?

Thanks,

Ryan

BUGS (Zephyr v1.14.0-rc1) Feb 12 2019

Kumar Gala
 

Some Bug details:

268:bug

124:priority: low
109:priority: medium
6:priority: high

42:Coverity

41:area: Networking
15:area: Bluetooth
14:area: Drivers
13:nRF
12:area: Kernel
11:area: Logging
10:area: Xtensa
10:area: ARM
8:area: Samples
8:area: Documentation
8:NXP
8:ESP32
7:area: Shell
6:area: Sockets
5:area: USB
5:area: UART
5:area: Power Management
5:area: POSIX
5:area: Memory Protection
5:MISRA-C
4:area: Toolchains
4:area: I2C
4:area: Device Tree
4:area: Counter
4:area: Build System
3:west
3:net_conformance
3:good first issue
3:area: Watchdog
3:area: Timer
3:area: Security
3:area: PWM
3:area: NIOS2
3:area: GPIO
3:STM32
3:API
2:area: Tests
2:area: Testing
2:area: Sensors
2:area: SPI
2:area: Portability
2:area: Other
2:area: File System
2:area: C Library
2:area: Boards
2:area: ARC
2:EXT
1:to do
1:question
1:area: native port
1:area: mcumgr
1:area: X86
1:area: Testing Suite
1:area: Sanitycheck
1:area: Pinmux
1:area: PCI
1:area: OTA
1:area: LWM2M
1:area: IPC
1:area: Flash
1:area: Ethernet
1:area: Debugging
1:area: Crypto / RNG
1:area: Console
1:area: Configuration System
1:TSC
1:SiLabs
1:Security Review
1:RFC
1:OpenThread
1:LTS
1:ATMEL

Re: CMake comments to HTML? (PR #9947 CMake build architecture documentation)

Marc Herbert
 

Thanks Anas!

 

Correct no PR yet, sorry for the confusion. This is still at the early prototype stage however there's already a demo git commit - the one that produced the screenshot - linked from https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/issues/9947 and it should work "out of the box" on Linux. Ideas, suggestions and any other kind of feedback from anyone somewhat familiar with CMake or Sphinx and brave enough to review a few TODOs, FIXMEs and other question marks would be great already, thanks in advance. Github supports commenting on volatile commits for implementation details but higher level discussions are probably best "centralized" in an issue: 9947 or some (new?) other?

 

Cheers,

 

Marc

 

 

From: "Nashif, Anas" <anas.nashif@...>
Date: Monday, 11 February 2019 at 16:50
To: Marc Herbert <marc.herbert@...>, "devel@..." <devel@...>
Cc: "Kinder, David B" <david.b.kinder@...>
Subject: RE: CMake comments to HTML? (PR #9947 CMake build architecture documentation)

 

I think this looks great.

 

9947 is not a PR, it is an enhancement issue, got me confused for a second. So it is an open enhancement issue with not PR associated with it, if you have something , send a PR please.

 

Anas

 

From: devel@... [mailto:devel@...] On Behalf Of Marc Herbert
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2019 7:45 PM
To: devel@...
Cc: Kinder, David B <david.b.kinder@...>
Subject: [Zephyr-devel] CMake comments to HTML? (PR #9947 CMake build architecture documentation)

 

I tried the “moderncmakedomain” sphinx extension to prototype extracting CMake comments into html and it seems to work, see screenshot and PR below.

 

 

Dave (cc:) seems to like it.

 

Just a quick hack for now, Linux only. Two questions:

- Is the approach generally acceptable? Notably: is sphinx-moderncmakedomain acceptable as an additional pip3 requirement?

- If yes then is Sebastian's PR #9947 the correct place for this? I asked him privately but he’s either off or busy. If yes then let’s discuss there and not on the mailing-list.

 

 

Cheers,

 

Marc

 




Begin forwarded message:

 

Subject: Re: [zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr] CMake build architecture documentation (#9947)

Date: 11 February 2019 at 16:21:45 GMT-8

 

 

This is what the above commit produces:


You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

 

Re: CMake comments to HTML? (PR #9947 CMake build architecture documentation)

Nashif, Anas
 

I think this looks great.

 

9947 is not a PR, it is an enhancement issue, got me confused for a second. So it is an open enhancement issue with not PR associated with it, if you have something , send a PR please.

 

Anas

 

From: devel@... [mailto:devel@...] On Behalf Of Marc Herbert
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2019 7:45 PM
To: devel@...
Cc: Kinder, David B <david.b.kinder@...>
Subject: [Zephyr-devel] CMake comments to HTML? (PR #9947 CMake build architecture documentation)

 

I tried the “moderncmakedomain” sphinx extension to prototype extracting CMake comments into html and it seems to work, see screenshot and PR below.

 

 

Dave (cc:) seems to like it.

 

Just a quick hack for now, Linux only. Two questions:

- Is the approach generally acceptable? Notably: is sphinx-moderncmakedomain acceptable as an additional pip3 requirement?

- If yes then is Sebastian's PR #9947 the correct place for this? I asked him privately but he’s either off or busy. If yes then let’s discuss there and not on the mailing-list.

 

 

Cheers,

 

Marc

 



Begin forwarded message:

 

Subject: Re: [zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr] CMake build architecture documentation (#9947)

Date: 11 February 2019 at 16:21:45 GMT-8

 

 

This is what the above commit produces:


You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

 

CMake comments to HTML? (PR #9947 CMake build architecture documentation)

Marc Herbert
 

I tried the “moderncmakedomain” sphinx extension to prototype extracting CMake comments into html and it seems to work, see screenshot and PR below.


Dave (cc:) seems to like it.

Just a quick hack for now, Linux only. Two questions:
- Is the approach generally acceptable? Notably: is sphinx-moderncmakedomain acceptable as an additional pip3 requirement?
- If yes then is Sebastian's PR #9947 the correct place for this? I asked him privately but he’s either off or busy. If yes then let’s discuss there and not on the mailing-list.


Cheers,

Marc


Begin forwarded message:

Subject: Re: [zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr] CMake build architecture documentation (#9947)
Date: 11 February 2019 at 16:21:45 GMT-8


This is what the above commit produces:


You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.


BUGS (Zephyr v1.14.0-rc1) Feb 11 2019

Kumar Gala
 

All,

Wanted to provide some bug stats so we can hopefully drive the total number of bugs down to single digits for the LTS release:

Some Bug details:

265:bug

125:priority: low
112:priority: medium
5:priority: high

43:Coverity

41:area: Networking
14:area: Drivers
14:area: Bluetooth
12:area: Logging
11:area: Kernel
10:nRF
10:area: Xtensa
10:area: ARM
9:NXP
8:area: Samples
8:area: Documentation
6:area: Sockets
6:area: Shell
6:ESP32
5:area: Power Management
5:area: POSIX
5:area: Memory Protection
5:MISRA-C
4:area: USB
4:area: UART
4:area: Toolchains
4:area: NIOS2
4:area: I2C
4:area: Device Tree
4:area: Build System
3:west
3:net_conformance
3:good first issue
3:area: Timer
3:area: Security
3:area: PWM
3:area: GPIO
3:area: Counter
3:STM32
3:API
2:area: Tests
2:area: Testing
2:area: Sensors
2:area: SPI
2:area: Portability
2:area: Other
2:area: File System
2:area: C Library
2:area: Boards
2:area: ARC
2:EXT
1:to do
1:question
1:area: native port
1:area: mcumgr
1:area: X86
1:area: Watchdog
1:area: Testing Suite
1:area: Sanitycheck
1:area: Pinmux
1:area: PCI
1:area: OTA
1:area: LWM2M
1:area: IPC
1:area: Flash
1:area: Ethernet
1:area: Debugging
1:area: Crypto / RNG
1:area: Console
1:area: Configuration System
1:TSC
1:SiLabs
1:Security Review
1:RFC
1:OpenThread
1:LTS

- k

ZEPHYR_TOOLCHAIN_VARIANT=host in docs? (Was: Zephyr SDK 0.10.0-rc2 available)

Marc Herbert
 

On 8 Feb 2019, at 08:28, Nashif, Anas <anas.nashif@...> wrote:

Do we make Zephyr 1.14 release with the stable 0.9.5 SDK?
No, Zephyr release is not tied to a toolchain. The SDK was always a one stop for everything you need to build and use zephyr, but you should be able to use any toolchain.
… including no “toolchain" in some cases thanks to ZEPHYR_TOOLCHAIN_VARIANT=host

I noticed ZEPHYR_TOOLCHAIN_VARIANT=host doesn’t seem mentioned in the documentation (I found it in the source). Would a one-liner in the "Getting Started" page be acceptable? I can submit.

https://docs.zephyrproject.org/latest/getting_started/index.html?highlight=zephyr_toolchain_variant
https://docs.zephyrproject.org/latest/search.html?q=zephyr_toolchain_variant

Marc

Zephyr v1.14.0-rc1 Tagged

Kumar Gala
 

Hi all,

We have just tagged Zephyr 1.14.0-rc1.

All required features that have not been pushed out to 1.14 are now merged, and so we begin the stabilization phase that should run for around 4 weeks this time. We will now start working on filling in the existing skeleton for the release notes, and closing PRs that need to come into the release. A reminder that, starting with -rc1, we will only accept changes introducing bug fixes, documentation and test cases. Any additional features or enhancements will need to be approved by the TSC.

As this release is meant as our first LTS we will be going through a longer stabilization phase to work on reducing our bug counts. Please focus on bugs during this period. If you submit a PR please ensure that it has the ‘v1.14.0’ Milestone set and either ’Bug’ or ’TSC’ label set on it.

The final release is tentatively scheduled for the 5th of April.

The full release log can be found here:
https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/releases/tag/v1.14.0-rc1

Thanks to everybody who contributed to this release!

Kumar

How to encrypt advertise packet with zephyr and nrf52832 ? #ble #nrf52832

icephyr
 
Edited

Hi guys, I'd like to encrypt the advertise packet since some secure fields in the payload. But I did not find any clue yet.

So anybody knows how to implement this feature with zephyr? Thank a lot if you guys can help on this issue.

Re: mcuboot : nrf52: warning during build

vikrant8051 <vikrant8051@...>
 

Hi Marti,
I followed your steps & its works for me.
Thank You !!


On Sun, Feb 10, 2019 at 1:50 AM Marti Bolivar <marti@...> wrote:
Hi Vikrant,

Thanks for the report.

The warnings are a known issue; please see: https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/issues/13194.

The reason mcuboot is not working with mainline zephyr is because this PR has not yet been merged:


You can apply mcuboot 405 to your local tree, build, and ignore the warnings for now until it is merged into mcuboot mainline. The power management warnings are unrelated.

Thanks,
Marti


On Sat, Feb 9, 2019, 12:30 PM vikrant8051 <vikrant8051@... wrote:
Hello,
I am getting following warning while building mcuboot :

warning: ‘enum power_states’ declared inside parameter list will not be visible outside of this definition or declaration
 void sys_power_state_post_ops(enum power_states state);


After this if we flash mcuboot + signed.hex, then that code is not
executing.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To solve this issue temporarily, I executed

cd zephyr
git checkout <old commit>

& repeat the process. Here everything works perfectly normal.

That means some bug has recently introduced.




Re: mcuboot : nrf52: warning during build

Marti Bolivar <marti@...>
 

Hi Vikrant,

Thanks for the report.

The warnings are a known issue; please see: https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/issues/13194.

The reason mcuboot is not working with mainline zephyr is because this PR has not yet been merged:


You can apply mcuboot 405 to your local tree, build, and ignore the warnings for now until it is merged into mcuboot mainline. The power management warnings are unrelated.

Thanks,
Marti


On Sat, Feb 9, 2019, 12:30 PM vikrant8051 <vikrant8051@... wrote:
Hello,
I am getting following warning while building mcuboot :

warning: ‘enum power_states’ declared inside parameter list will not be visible outside of this definition or declaration
 void sys_power_state_post_ops(enum power_states state);


After this if we flash mcuboot + signed.hex, then that code is not
executing.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To solve this issue temporarily, I executed

cd zephyr
git checkout <old commit>

& repeat the process. Here everything works perfectly normal.

That means some bug has recently introduced.




mcuboot : nrf52: warning during build

vikrant8051 <vikrant8051@...>
 

Hello,
I am getting following warning while building mcuboot :

warning: ‘enum power_states’ declared inside parameter list will not be visible outside of this definition or declaration
 void sys_power_state_post_ops(enum power_states state);


After this if we flash mcuboot + signed.hex, then that code is not
executing.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To solve this issue temporarily, I executed

cd zephyr
git checkout <old commit>

& repeat the process. Here everything works perfectly normal.

That means some bug has recently introduced.




Re: Zephyr SDK 0.10.0-rc2 available

Nashif, Anas
 

Do we make Zephyr 1.14 release with the stable 0.9.5 SDK?
No, Zephyr release is not tied to a toolchain. The SDK was always a one stop for everything you need to build and use zephyr, but you should be able to use any toolchain.

Anas

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Sokolovsky [mailto:paul.sokolovsky@...]
Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2019 12:21 PM
To: Nashif, Anas <anas.nashif@...>
Cc: devel@...
Subject: Re: [Zephyr-devel] Zephyr SDK 0.10.0-rc2 available

Hello Anas,

Do we make Zephyr 1.14 release with the stable 0.9.5 SDK?

On Tue, 5 Feb 2019 12:55:48 +0000
"Nashif, Anas" <anas.nashif@...> wrote:

Hi,
We are excited to announce the availability of a new pre-release of
the Zephyr SDK.

This release of the SDK provides a major update to all tools and
toolchains. The current SDK was based on yocto, this release uses
crosstool-ng for the toolchains and yocto for the host tools.

Major changes in this release:
[]

--
Best Regards,
Paul

Linaro.org | Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro
http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg - http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog

Re: Zephyr SDK 0.10.0-rc2 available

Nashif, Anas
 

Btw, nice upgrade in size comparing to "non-NG" SDK - from 300MB to 700MB. No chance that we just fix up the old SDK? ;-)
That's due to multilib arm and arc both 80% of the SDK if I remember correctly :)

Anas

-----Original Message-----
From: devel@... [mailto:devel@...] On Behalf Of Paul Sokolovsky
Sent: Friday, February 8, 2019 11:24 AM
To: Nashif, Anas <anas.nashif@...>
Cc: devel@...
Subject: Re: [Zephyr-devel] Zephyr SDK 0.10.0-rc2 available

Hello,

On Tue, 5 Feb 2019 20:21:01 +0300
"Paul Sokolovsky" <paul.sokolovsky@...> wrote:

Hello Anas,

Do we make Zephyr 1.14 release with the stable 0.9.5 SDK?
Ping @nashif.

Btw, nice upgrade in size comparing to "non-NG" SDK - from 300MB to 700MB. No chance that we just fix up the old SDK? ;-)


On Tue, 5 Feb 2019 12:55:48 +0000
"Nashif, Anas" <anas.nashif@...> wrote:

Hi,
We are excited to announce the availability of a new pre-release of
the Zephyr SDK.

This release of the SDK provides a major update to all tools and
toolchains. The current SDK was based on yocto, this release uses
crosstool-ng for the toolchains and yocto for the host tools.

Major changes in this release:
[]


--
Best Regards,
Paul

Linaro.org | Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro
http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg - http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog

Re: Zephyr SDK 0.10.0-rc2 available

Paul Sokolovsky
 

Hello,

On Tue, 5 Feb 2019 20:21:01 +0300
"Paul Sokolovsky" <paul.sokolovsky@...> wrote:

Hello Anas,

Do we make Zephyr 1.14 release with the stable 0.9.5 SDK?
Ping @nashif.

Btw, nice upgrade in size comparing to "non-NG" SDK - from 300MB to
700MB. No chance that we just fix up the old SDK? ;-)


On Tue, 5 Feb 2019 12:55:48 +0000
"Nashif, Anas" <anas.nashif@...> wrote:

Hi,
We are excited to announce the availability of a new pre-release of
the Zephyr SDK.

This release of the SDK provides a major update to all tools and
toolchains. The current SDK was based on yocto, this release uses
crosstool-ng for the toolchains and yocto for the host tools.

Major changes in this release:
[]


--
Best Regards,
Paul

Linaro.org | Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro
http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg - http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog

BT MESH SENSOR MODEL: BT_MESH_MODEL_ID_SENSOR_SRV #bluetoothmesh #zephyrbluetoothmesh

William Fish
 

Hi All,
I am looking at implementing a sensor network via BLE Mesh and am looking for any information on the implementation of the SENSOR MESH MODEL.

Can anyone point me in the right direction? 

Many thanks in advance.

Billy..

Re: Pairing/bonding Zephyr API? Pairing info?

frv
 

Hi Johan,

The QEMU concept looks great, just what I'm looking for. Thanks,
Best regards,
Frank

Re: Code Freeze for 1.14 on Friday Feb 1st

Armando Visconti
 


Just wanted to remind everyone that the code freeze for 1.14 will be
this Friday. Please tag any PR as with 1.14 milestone that you feel
should try and get merged as part of 1.14.
So, did the freeze officially happen on last Friday? What next steps
can we expect?
I guess it has been postponed to this Friday:

https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/wiki/Program-Management

Armando