I'm guessing that these relocations are there everywhere and that yours just happens to be a binutils recent enough to warn about it. Have you tried just removing the "-Wl,--fatal-warnings" bit from s

Boie, Andrew P wrote: Yeah, this is sorta wrong. GCC[1] is AFAIK consistent and sane within a single architecture, but the packing order varies between endianness conventions and officially they docum

Paul Sokolovsky <paul.sokolovsky@...> wrote (on Thursday, April 06, 2017 11:04PM): I'm not completely sure I buy that. If your consumer thread isn't being scheduled due to all the UART interrup

Tidy(chunhua) Jiang <tidyjiang(a)163.com> wrote (on Tuesday, January 03, 2017 10:59PM): Zephyr doesn't really have a facility for device-specific modifications to linker scripts at the moment. The scr

Paul Sokolovsky wrote (on Tuesday, October 11, 2016 10:22AM): FWIW, I don't know enough about the uIP stack to add anything technical, but: An even better way to make sure that report isn't lost is to

Marcus Shawcroft wrote (on Thursday, October 06, 2016 8:26AM): Ah, gotcha. Yeah, you're totally right. The only trick I can see with merging this would be verifying that no existing drivers are accide

Marcus Shawcroft wrote (on Thursday, October 06, 2016 3:18AM): Actually it goes into the ROM data section anyway, despite the lack of const. This is controlled in device.h by declaring the device_conf

Fabien Parent wrote (on Wednesday, October 05, 2016 7:56AM): Those fingerprints are stored on your local machine, there's no need for a server admin to address this. This is what I have if you want to

Benjamin Walsh wrote (on Friday, September 23, 2016 2:36PM): Naming isn't a big deal, but I'll reiterate my previous point: a ring buffer is a data structure, not an OS abstraction provided by a kerne

Korovkin, Dmitriy (Wind River) wrote (on Friday, September 23, 2016 12:33PM): That sounds more like a hybrid between a ring buffer (a data structure) and a fifo (an IPC mechanism). I think there's val

Korovkin, Dmitriy wrote: https://gerrit.zephyrproject.org/r/#/c/4954/

Bag, Amit K wrote: I'm a little curious about this API design too. AFAICT, it's always legal to statically allocate a k_timer struct of your own and initialize and use it at runtime. If you need to kn

Dmitriy Korovkin wrote: What's the use case? We don't really have a working exception/longjmp framework that could clean up things after a stack unwind, so what value is an "abort handler" going to pr

Mitsis, Peter wrote: +1 from me at least. Nothing in any relevant platform standards I'm aware of say anything about unused stack contents at thread start or entry to main(), and programmers and compi

As promised, the prototype is up for review here: https://gerrit.zephyrproject.org/r/4871 zconfig.h: Add DEFINED() macro for expresion-legal ifdef-checking https://gerrit.zephyrproject.org/r/4872 DO N

Benjamin Walsh wrote: Will do. I'm calling it zpoll only because the semantics aren't exactly equivalent to unix poll and I didn't want to address the confusion. But that naming is probably better. Th

Joseph, Jithu wrote: Right. It's made from the system work queue, the same thread that handles {nano,k}_work_submit entries. The signal call is typically going to be made from interrupt context, which

So I've been looking at the requirement for an async I/O framework in ZEP-540, and this is the API I have so far. An implementation is prototyped as far as working with a minimal test of a faked devic

Vinayak Kariappa Chettimada wrote: Yeah, this got some water-cooler attention last week. So it seems what you're really asking for is an interrupt bottom half framework for zephyr. So you can have you

Liu, Baohong wrote: Senseless nitpick: this unit choice will hit precision issues. Many/most PWM implementations in the wild work on clocks in the low MHz, so this is only going to return a few bits o