Changeset d61230b in rtems-testing


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Jul 10, 2009, 8:19:58 PM (10 years ago)
Author:
Joel Sherrill <joel.sherrill@…>
Branches:
4.11, 8895273c193787f84c4585a10f6d6aceb3b25dc4
Children:
41017ec
Parents:
737f1dc
Message:

2009-07-10 Joel Sherrill <joel.sherrill@…>

  • Explanations.txt: Add new interrupt synchronization tests.
  • do_coverage: Add RTEMS_DO_NOT_UNROLL_THREADQ_ENQUEUE_PRIORITY to reduce number of cases in _Thread_queue_Enqueue_priority.
Location:
rtems-coverage
Files:
3 edited

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
  • rtems-coverage/ChangeLog

    r737f1dc rd61230b  
     12009-07-10      Joel Sherrill <joel.sherrill@OARcorp.com>
     2
     3        * Explanations.txt: Add new interrupt synchronization tests.
     4        * do_coverage: Add RTEMS_DO_NOT_UNROLL_THREADQ_ENQUEUE_PRIORITY to
     5        reduce number of cases in _Thread_queue_Enqueue_priority.
     6
    172009-07-09      Joel Sherrill <joel.sherrill@OARcorp.com>
    28
  • rtems-coverage/Explanations.txt

    r737f1dc rd61230b  
    322322threadinitialize.c:91
    323323Simple Test Case
    324 This is for the case where the application uses the POSIX 
     324This is for the case where the application uses the POSIX
    325325thread stack address attribute.
    326326
     
    350350+++
    351351
    352 threadqenqueuepriority.c:92
     352threadqenqueuepriority.c:99
    353353Interrupt Synchronization
    354354This case is where we are iterating to enqueue a thread into a priority
    355355based thread queue but the thread we are looking at gets unblocked when
    356 we flash interrupts.
    357 +++
    358 
    359 threadqenqueuepriority.c:131
    360 Simple Test Case
    361 I think! this is a case where we enqueue by priority with a thread
    362 priority that requires searching from last to first.  But there is
    363 already a thread priority on the chain.  This priority will go before
    364 any in the set.  So we search backwards and insert at the head.
     356we flash interrupts.  It is NOT the thread we are unblocking.
     357Forward Search case.
     358+++
     359
     360threadqenqueuepriority.c:146
     361Interrupt Synchronization
     362This case is where we are iterating to enqueue a thread into a priority
     363based thread queue but the thread we are looking at gets unblocked when
     364we flash interrupts.  It is NOT the thread we are unblocking.
     365Reverse Search case.
    365366+++
    366367
    367368corebarrierwait.c:64
    368369Simple Test Case
    369 This looks like a simple test case of being a automatically released
     370This looks like a simple test case of being an automatically released
    370371barrier and being the Nth task to block so tripping the automatic release.
    371372+++
     
    381382dead because there is an explicit check for the chain being empty on the
    382383loop but a call to _Chain_Get_unprotected also checks for empty.  So we never
    383 get a case there _Chain_Get_unprotected returns NULL.  Can usually be 
     384get a case there _Chain_Get_unprotected returns NULL.  Can usually be
    384385addressed by reworking the loop in some way.
    385 +++
    386 
    387 threadqenqueuepriority.c:139
    388 Interrupt Synchronization
    389 restart insertion search
    390 +++
    391 
    392 threadqenqueuepriority.c:189
    393 Simple Test Case
    394 need sp41 test cases with priority semaphore
    395386+++
    396387
     
    411402watchdogadjusttochain.c:42
    412403Simple Test Case
    413 I am pretty sure this is a case where we need to adjust the 
     404I am pretty sure this is a case where we need to adjust the
    414405chain forward multiple units but still end up with watchdogs
    415406left on the chain at the end.  So things farther out in the future
  • rtems-coverage/do_coverage

    r737f1dc rd61230b  
    234234     RTEMS_DO_NOT_INLINE_THREAD_ENABLE_DISPATCH=1 \
    235235     RTEMS_DO_NOT_INLINE_CORE_MUTEX_SEIZE=1 \
     236     RTEMS_DO_NOT_UNROLL_THREADQ_ENQUEUE_PRIORITY=1 \
    236237    --target=${TARGET} --enable-rtemsbsp=${BSP} \
    237238    --enable-maintainer-mode \
Note: See TracChangeset for help on using the changeset viewer.