Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

STM: Update linker script for using SRAM1 and SRAM2 in ARM #10018

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Apr 26, 2019

Conversation

Projects
None yet
8 participants
@deepikabhavnani
Copy link
Contributor

commented Mar 8, 2019

Description

To have the flexibilty in application; to use any of the section (data/bss/heap) without updating linker script in every use case, following decisions are made:

  1. Fixed size and small sections moved to SRAM2 (32K)
    Vectors
    Crash data
    Stack
    Remaining section - RW / ZI
  2. Large memory space should be used for variable sections
    RW/ZI
    Heap - (Minimum - xxx target based)

Pull request type

[X] Fix
[ ] Refactor
[ ] Target update
[ ] Functionality change
[ ] Docs update
[ ] Test update
[ ] Breaking change

@ciarmcom ciarmcom requested review from screamerbg and ARMmbed/mbed-os-maintainers Mar 8, 2019

@ciarmcom

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Mar 8, 2019

@deepikabhavnani, thank you for your changes.
@screamerbg @ARMmbed/mbed-os-maintainers please review.

@deepikabhavnani deepikabhavnani force-pushed the deepikabhavnani:stm32_heap_armc6 branch from 897a7d2 to ace2397 Mar 8, 2019

@jeromecoutant
Copy link
Contributor

left a comment

Few questions.
But as a general question, not easy to approve a specific PR for 2 targets and 1 toolchain only
@LMESTM

@0xc0170 0xc0170 added needs: work and removed needs: review labels Mar 11, 2019

@adbridge

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Mar 27, 2019

@deepikabhavnani what is the status of this PR? It at least needs a rebase...

@cmonr

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Mar 27, 2019

Closing for now since @deepikabhavnani is out until 2nd week of April.

@cmonr cmonr closed this Mar 27, 2019

@cmonr cmonr removed the needs: work label Mar 27, 2019

@deepikabhavnani

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Apr 9, 2019

@ARMmbed/mbed-os-maintainers - Can we please reopen this?

@cmonr cmonr reopened this Apr 9, 2019

@cmonr

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Apr 9, 2019

@deepikabhavnani Done!

Looks like this needs a rebase.

@cmonr cmonr added the needs: work label Apr 9, 2019

@deepikabhavnani deepikabhavnani force-pushed the deepikabhavnani:stm32_heap_armc6 branch from ace2397 to d5c3fc5 Apr 9, 2019

@deepikabhavnani

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Apr 9, 2019

Rebased to resolve conflicts

Update linker script for using SRAM1 and SRAM2 in ARM
    To have the flexibilty in application; to use any of the section
    (data/bss/heap) without updating linker script in every use case,
    following decisions are made:
    1. Fixed size and small sections moved to SRAM2 (32K)
        Vectors
        Crash data
        Remaining section - RW / ZI
    2. Large memory space should be used for variable sections
       RW/ZI
       Heap - (Minimum - 0x12000)
       Stack - At bottom

@deepikabhavnani deepikabhavnani force-pushed the deepikabhavnani:stm32_heap_armc6 branch from d5c3fc5 to feba293 Apr 9, 2019

@deepikabhavnani

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Apr 9, 2019

@jeromecoutant - Please review

@cmonr cmonr added needs: review and removed needs: work labels Apr 9, 2019

@jeromecoutant
Copy link
Contributor

left a comment

I could approve, but who takes the action to align all scatter files of all targets...

@deepikabhavnani

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Apr 10, 2019

I could approve, but who takes the action to align all scatter files of all targets...

Aligning all scatter files for devices supporting multiple RAM bank is the query I suppose? Existing linker scripts work and are aligned to Mbed OS memory map but both RAM banks were not utilized. Linker scripts for Pelion platform/applications in need of more RAM were requested hence updating the ones in need now. Rest shall be updated as part of Pelion porting, or can also add issue in Mbed OS to keep track.

@cmonr cmonr added needs: CI and removed needs: review labels Apr 12, 2019

@cmonr

cmonr approved these changes Apr 12, 2019

@cmonr

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Apr 12, 2019

CI started

@mbed-ci

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Apr 12, 2019

Test run: FAILED

Summary: 1 of 7 test jobs failed
Build number : 1
Build artifacts

Failed test jobs:

  • jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-ARM
@0xc0170

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Apr 12, 2019

heap and stack overlaps in the build logs - one target failures, please review

@0xc0170 0xc0170 added needs: work and removed needs: CI labels Apr 12, 2019

@deepikabhavnani

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Apr 12, 2019

heap and stack overlaps in the build logs - one target failures, please review

4b7e163 - shall fix this

@0xc0170

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Apr 15, 2019

CI started

@mbed-ci

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Apr 15, 2019

Test run: FAILED

Summary: 1 of 11 test jobs failed
Build number : 2
Build artifacts

Failed test jobs:

  • jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_dynamic-memory-usage
@deepikabhavnani

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Apr 15, 2019

Failed test jobs:
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_dynamic-memory-usage

Where can I find log for failing job?

@alekla01

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Apr 15, 2019

restarted jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_dynamic-memory-usage

@deepikabhavnani

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Apr 17, 2019

continuous-integration/jenkins/pr-head - Looks like same auto-trigger issue

@0xc0170 0xc0170 removed the request for review from screamerbg Apr 18, 2019

@0xc0170 0xc0170 added needs: CI and removed needs: work labels Apr 18, 2019

@0xc0170

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Apr 18, 2019

CI restarted

@mbed-ci

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Apr 18, 2019

Test run: SUCCESS

Summary: 11 of 11 test jobs passed
Build number : 5
Build artifacts

@deepikabhavnani

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Apr 23, 2019

@ARMmbed/mbed-os-maintainers : Approved + CI is success

@adbridge

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Apr 25, 2019

ci started

@mbed-ci

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Apr 25, 2019

Test run: SUCCESS

Summary: 11 of 11 test jobs passed
Build number : 6
Build artifacts

@adbridge adbridge merged commit 536da47 into ARMmbed:master Apr 26, 2019

26 checks passed

continuous-integration/jenkins/pr-head This commit looks good
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
jenkins-ci/build-ARM Success
Details
jenkins-ci/build-GCC_ARM Success
Details
jenkins-ci/build-IAR Success
Details
jenkins-ci/cloud-client-test Success
Details
jenkins-ci/dynamic-memory-usage Success
Details
jenkins-ci/exporter Success
Details
jenkins-ci/greentea-test Success
Details
jenkins-ci/mbed2-build-ARM Success
Details
jenkins-ci/mbed2-build-GCC_ARM Success
Details
jenkins-ci/mbed2-build-IAR Success
Details
jenkins-ci/unittests Success
Details
travis-ci/astyle Success!
Details
travis-ci/docs Success!
Details
travis-ci/doxy-spellcheck Success!
Details
travis-ci/events Success! Runtime is 8561 cycles.
Details
travis-ci/gitattributestest Success!
Details
travis-ci/include_check Success!
Details
travis-ci/licence_check Success!
Details
travis-ci/littlefs Success! Code size is 8448B.
Details
travis-ci/psa-autogen Success!
Details
travis-ci/tools-py2.7 Success!
Details
travis-ci/tools-py3.5 Success!
Details
travis-ci/tools-py3.6 Success!
Details
travis-ci/tools-py3.7 Success!
Details
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.