Description

In this PR:

Added the FREERTOS_RISCV_EXTENSION option along with two port target GCC_RISC_V_GENERIC and IAR_RISC_V_GENERIC to allow the user to select which chip extension they want included.
Move the change to port cmake file to keep the root cmake file clean.
Developers use existing RISC-V ports with cmake won't have be effected

Existing RISC-V cmake port only support the following combinations:

FREERTOS_PORT = GCC_RISC_V, chip extension = RISCV_MTIME_CLINT_no_extensions
FREERTOS_PORT = GCC_RISC_V_PULPINO_VEGA_RV32M1RM, chip extension = Pulpino_Vega_RV32M1RM
FREERTOS_PORT = IAR_RISC_V, chip extension = RV32I_CLINT_no_extensions

To support other combinations, two generic port targets are created:

FREERTOS_PORT = GCC_RISC_V_GENERIC
FREERTOS_PORT = IAR_RISC_V_GENERIC

User has to specify FREERTOS_RISCV_EXTENSION in the cmake file to use these ports:

set( FREERTOS_PORT "GCC_RISC_V_GENERIC" CACHE STRING "" FORCE)
set( FREERTOS_RISCV_EXTENSION RISCV_MTIME_CLINT_no_extensions CACHE STRING "" FORCE )

Test Steps

n/a

Checklist:

[x] I have tested my changes. No regression in existing tests.
[ ] I have modified and/or added unit-tests to cover the code changes in this Pull Request.

Related Issue

772

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.

kar-rahul-aws commented 1 year ago

Hi @JoeBenczarski Thank you for your valuable contribution. We will review the PR and get back to you.

codecov[bot] commented 1 year ago

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Comparison is base (5281427) 93.64% compared to head (24cbfa2) 93.64%.

Additional details and impacted files

```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## main #773 +/- ## ======================================= Coverage 93.64% 93.64% ======================================= Files 6 6 Lines 2549 2549 Branches 608 608 ======================================= Hits 2387 2387 Misses 107 107 Partials 55 55 ``` | [Flag](https://app.codecov.io/gh/FreeRTOS/FreeRTOS-Kernel/pull/773/flags?src=pr&el=flags&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=FreeRTOS) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [unittests](https://app.codecov.io/gh/FreeRTOS/FreeRTOS-Kernel/pull/773/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=FreeRTOS) | `93.64% <ø> (ø)` | | Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. [Click here](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/carryforward-flags?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=FreeRTOS#carryforward-flags-in-the-pull-request-comment) to find out more.

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

chinglee-iot commented 1 year ago

@JoeBenczarski Thank your for creating this PR. It looks like the change will break existing rics-v project with cmake. Suggest we create two new ports for FREERTOS_CHIP_EXTENSION

GCC_RISC_V_GENERIC
IAR_RISC_V_GENERIC

Please help to take a look at this [PR] suggestion(https://github.com/JoeBenczarski/FreeRTOS-Kernel/pull/1)

JoeBenczarski commented 1 year ago

@JoeBenczarski Thank your for creating this PR. It looks like the change will break existing rics-v project with cmake. Suggest we create two new ports for FREERTOS_CHIP_EXTENSION

GCC_RISC_V_GENERIC

IAR_RISC_V_GENERIC

Please help to take a look at this [PR] suggestion(JoeBenczarski#1)

Good idea. I just merged that PR.

chinglee-iot commented 1 year ago

@JoeBenczarski Thank your for creating this PR. It looks like the change will break existing rics-v project with cmake. Suggest we create two new ports for FREERTOS_CHIP_EXTENSION

GCC_RISC_V_GENERIC

IAR_RISC_V_GENERIC

Please help to take a look at this [PR] suggestion(JoeBenczarski#1)

Good idea. I just merged that PR.

Thank you. I will also update the description of this PR and ask for another reviewer's opinion.