Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to github.com

Skip to content

Conversation

bradjc
Copy link
Contributor

@bradjc bradjc commented Mar 22, 2021

Pull Request Overview

Per @alevy, Niklas isn't planning on being actively involved in Tock, and no longer needs to be on the Core WG. This is helpful because of our PR merging and release process, which expects all core members to sign off on certain things.

Testing Strategy

n/a

TODO or Help Wanted

This is a strange PR to create. Maybe we should create at least a "past members" list?

Documentation Updated

  • Updated the relevant files in /docs, or no updates are required.

Formatting

  • Ran make prepush.

@bradjc bradjc added the P-Significant This is a substancial change that requires review from all core developers. label Mar 22, 2021
Copy link
Member

@niklasad1 niklasad1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

thanks, it's fine I think the commit history speaks for itself.

@alevy
Copy link
Member

alevy commented Mar 22, 2021

@niklasad1 thanks for all your contributions over the years and your continued feedback! ❤️

@bradjc bradjc requested a review from a team March 22, 2021 16:47
@alevy alevy mentioned this pull request Mar 22, 2021
18 tasks
@alevy
Copy link
Member

alevy commented Mar 22, 2021

bors r+

@bradjc
Copy link
Contributor Author

bradjc commented Mar 22, 2021

Haha breaking procedure on a procedure PR.

@alevy
Copy link
Member

alevy commented Mar 22, 2021

Haha breaking procedure on a procedure PR.

🤣

Well, we've already started merging #2446, which is the actual kind of PR where this would matter, so... yeah. Also, technically, I don't think our "procedure" requires us to block on the whole core team to remove someone who approves themselves. I think we're legally in the clear on this one.

@bradjc
Copy link
Contributor Author

bradjc commented Mar 22, 2021

Hmm, I guess we can leave whether legally speaking the unanimous approval or a week time provision applies in this case as unsettled. :)

Copy link
Contributor

@jrvanwhy jrvanwhy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

+1 to creating a past members list.

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors bot commented Mar 22, 2021

@bors bors bot merged commit e916444 into master Mar 22, 2021
@bors bors bot deleted the core-wg-2021-03 branch March 22, 2021 19:01
bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 22, 2021
2446: Tock 2.0 Alpha1 r=alevy a=bradjc

### Pull Request Overview

This pull request updates the Tock kernel to the 2.0 kernel<->userspace interface.

The current plan is to merge this on Monday, March 22, once @lschuermann has cleaned up the commit log.

**This is an API breaking change!**

Merging this PR will break the Tock 1.0 agreement with userspace. When this PR is merged, Tock is in "release mode" towards 2.0. The major version number change signifies the breaking change for userspace. We expect that merging this PR will create ~~v2.0-rc1~~ v2.0-alpha1, and further development towards v2.0 will occur on the master branch until the release.

However, merging this PR only signifies breaking the 1.0 API, it does not imply the 2.0 interface is stabilized. We expect more development before settling on the final 2.0 API.

Here are the three major items that we have to do before merging the `tock-2.0-dev` branch into master: 
1. [x] Completely wrap up the system call API/ABI updates (I think this is all that's left: tock/libtock-c#177; we might need a follow-up one for TOCK_EBADRVAL, but this is not blocking)
2. [x] Update documentation, so it is consistent with the code: Markdown files (Syscalls.md, Userland.md)
3. [x] Update documentation, so it is consistent with the code: the Tock book tock/book#13
4. [x] Update documentation, so it is consistent with the code: courses #2455 
5. [x] Overall code review (this PR)
6. [x] Change Callback to Upcall #2454 
7. [x] Change GenericSyscallReturnValue to SyscallReturn
8. [x] Clean up commit log (@lschuermann )
9. [x] libtock-c testing (@phil-levis ), tock/libtock-c#195

Then, before we can tag an RC1, we need to complete everything in #2429.

### Merge Sign-Off

This is a big change, and API breaking. It would be good to get consensus. Can you please check your name when you are ready for this PR to be merged? Doing it this way 1) allows me to participate and 2) doesn't change as new commits are added.

- ~[ ] Niklas Adolfsson, @niklasad1~ (#2495)
- [x] Hudson Ayers, @hudson-ayers
- [x] Brad Campbell, @bradjc
- [x] Branden Ghena, @brghena
- [x] Philip Levis, @phil-levis
- [x] Amit Levy, @alevy
- [x] Pat Pannuto, @ppannuto 
- [x] Johnathan Van Why, @jrvanwhy


### Testing Strategy

This PR was tested incrementally as features were added and changes were made. It was also tested at the end with libtock-c using the imix test application (which does many different system calls and system call patterns) as well as MPU test applications.


### TODO or Help Wanted

For this PR, nothing. Before release, #2429 


### Documentation Updated

- [x] Updated the relevant files in `/docs`, or no updates are required.

### Formatting

- [x] Ran `make prepush`.


Co-authored-by: bors[bot] <26634292+bors[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Leon Schuermann <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Alexandru Radovici <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Philip Levis <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Hudson Ayers <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation P-Significant This is a substancial change that requires review from all core developers.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants