Changes between Version 5 and Version 6 of GSoC/2009/Wrapup


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Oct 12, 2009, 10:59:29 PM (10 years ago)
Author:
Vattam
Comment:

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • GSoC/2009/Wrapup

    v5 v6  
    77The RTEMS Project had 7 very good students this year.  We were extremely pleased because of their results, their interaction with other projects, each other, and the community.  The first three projects presented were interesting as individual efforts but there was an overlap at the end in what we called "bonus" work.  We asked each student to identify pessimistic, realistic, and optimistic deliverables.  The work in the optimistic phase was the "bonus" work. Software development is not always easy to predict and the lesson we wanted to impart was that a customer (e.g. us) was more likely to be happy if you told them what you thought would happen if everything went smoothly, if you got bad breaks, and if things go as you expect they will.  Our bonus was seeing the cross-pollination that is common in FOSS.
    88
    9 Xi Yang's project was to provide more RTEMS Board Support Packages (BSPs) that run on the free Skyeye (http://www.skyeye.org/) simulator and improve testing capabilities when using Skyeye.   We use Skyeye to test RTEMS as well as GCC (http://gcc.gnu.org).  Another student, Santosh Vattam, was working on improving the Object Coverage (http://code.google.com/p/rtems-coverage-analysis/ | blog) of our testsuites for a core part of RTEMS. Our initial coverage reports were generated for the SPARC/ERC32 using the closed source simulator TSIM (http://www.gaisler.com).  As the coverage began to approach 100%, I began to run the coverage reports on various ARM targets using Skyeye using Xi's work. Santosh and I addressed cases which appeared to be test suite deficiencies while apparent simulator anomalies were passed on to Xi. During this, an obscure bug in RTEMS was uncovered and Xi and I worked together via chat to solve it.  At the end of the summer, 3 SPARC and 2 ARM configurations were either at 100% or very close. The graph shown below is the coverage progress of sparc/erc32 through the GSoC timeline.  Work has continued since GSoC concluded and current results are available at http://www.rtems.org/ftp/pub/rtems/people/joel/coverage/ for ARM, m68k, PowerPC, SPARC, and x86.
     9Xi Yang's project was to provide more RTEMS Board Support Packages (BSPs) that run on the free Skyeye (http://www.skyeye.org/) simulator and improve testing capabilities when using Skyeye.   We use Skyeye to test RTEMS as well as GCC (http://gcc.gnu.org).  Another student, Santosh Vattam (blogs at: http://vattamsantosh.info), was working on improving the Object Coverage (http://code.google.com/p/rtems-coverage-analysis/) of our testsuites for a core part of RTEMS. Our initial coverage reports were generated for the SPARC/ERC32 using the closed source simulator TSIM (http://www.gaisler.com).  As the coverage began to approach 100%, I began to run the coverage reports on various ARM targets using Skyeye using Xi's work. Santosh and I addressed cases which appeared to be test suite deficiencies while apparent simulator anomalies were passed on to Xi. During this, an obscure bug in RTEMS was uncovered and Xi and I worked together via chat to solve it.  At the end of the summer, 3 SPARC and 2 ARM configurations were either at 100% or very close. The graph shown below is the coverage progress of sparc/erc32 through the GSoC timeline.  Work has continued since GSoC concluded and current results are available at http://www.rtems.org/ftp/pub/rtems/people/joel/coverage/ for ARM, m68k, PowerPC, SPARC, and x86.
    1010
    1111[[Image(Coverage_refined.png)]]