repo_name stringlengths 1 62 | dataset stringclasses 1
value | lang stringclasses 11
values | pr_id int64 1 20.1k | owner stringlengths 2 34 | reviewer stringlengths 2 39 | diff_hunk stringlengths 15 262k | code_review_comment stringlengths 1 99.6k |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | typescript | 5 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -117,17 +117,104 @@ export const codeReview = async (
if (files_to_review.length > 0) {
const commenter: Commenter = new Commenter()
- const [, review_begin_ids] = await bot.chat(
- prompts.render_review_beginning(inputs),
- {}
- )
- let next_review_ids = review_begin_ids
-
+ // Summa... | :robot: ChatGPT
This patch adds a new feature to the code review process, which generates release notes and adds them to the PR description. The implementation looks good and well-structured. However, it would be better to add some error handling for the case when the tag is not found in the PR description. LGTM!
<!-... |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | typescript | 5 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -175,17 +262,6 @@ export const codeReview = async (
} else {
next_review_ids = review_diff_ids
}
-
- // summarize diff
- const [summarize_resp, summarize_diff_ids] = await bot.chat(
- prompts.render_summarize_file_diff(inputs),
- next_summari... | :robot: ChatGPT
This patch removes the code that summarizes the diff of each file. It seems like a reasonable decision to remove this feature, as it may not be necessary for every file and could potentially slow down the review process. LGTM!
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by ChatGPT --> |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | typescript | 5 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -232,76 +308,10 @@ export const codeReview = async (
}
}
}
- // final summary
- const [summarize_final_response, summarize_final_response_ids] =
- await bot.chat(prompts.render_summarize(inputs), next_summarize_ids)
- if (!summarize_final_response) {
- core.info('summarize: no... | :robot: ChatGPT
This patch removes the code that generates the final summary and release notes. It seems like a reasonable decision to remove this feature, as it may not be necessary for every review and could potentially slow down the review process. LGTM!
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by ChatGPT --> |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | others | 5 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
# ChatGPT based PR reviewer and summarizer
+
+
## Overview
This [ChatGPT](https://platform.openai.com/docs/guides/chat) based GitHub Action provides a summary, release notes and review of pull requests. The prompts have been tuned for concise response. To prevent excess... | :robot: ChatGPT
LGTM! The developer has added an AI image to the README, which is a nice touch.
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by ChatGPT --> |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | others | 5 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -173,7 +175,6 @@ Set `debug: true` in the workflow file to enable debug mode, which will show the
### Special Thanks
-This GitHub Action is based on
+This GitHub Action is based on
[ChatGPT Action](https://github.com/unsafecoerce/chatgpt-pr-reviewer)
by [Tao He](https://github.com/sighingnow). | :robot: ChatGPT
LGTM! The removal of the extra line improves readability.
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by ChatGPT --> |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | typescript | 5 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -147,7 +153,7 @@ export class Options {
review_comment_lgtm = false,
path_filters: string[] | null = null,
system_message = '',
- temperature = '0.2'
+ temperature = '0.0'
) {
this.debug = debug
this.chatgpt_reverse_proxy = chatgpt_reverse_proxy | :robot: ChatGPT
This patch modifies the `Options` class constructor to set the default temperature value to 0.0 instead of 0.2. It seems reasonable and does not introduce any new issues.
LGTM!
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by ChatGPT --> |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | typescript | 5 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -212,7 +288,8 @@ export const codeReview = async (
continue
}
next_review_ids = patch_ids
- if (!options.review_comment_lgtm && response.includes('LGTM')) {
+ // if the response contains LGTM (case insensitive), then skip commenting
+ if (!options.review_comment_lgtm... | :robot: ChatGPT
The patch improves the `codeReview` function by making it case-insensitive when checking for the "LGTM" response. This is a good improvement as it makes the code more robust and flexible. LGTM!
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by ChatGPT --> |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | typescript | 5 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -232,76 +309,10 @@ export const codeReview = async (
}
}
}
- // final summary
- const [summarize_final_response, summarize_final_response_ids] =
- await bot.chat(prompts.render_summarize(inputs), next_summarize_ids)
- if (!summarize_final_response) {
- core.info('summarize: no... | :robot: ChatGPT
The patch removes the `summarize_final_response` and `release_notes_response` functionality from the `codeReview` function. This is a good improvement as it reduces code duplication and makes the function more focused on its main purpose. LGTM!
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by ChatGPT --> |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | others | 5 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -26,4 +26,4 @@ jobs:
OPENAI_API_KEY: ${{ secrets.OPENAI_API_KEY }}
with:
debug: true
- review_comment_lgtm: true
+ review_comment_lgtm: false | :robot: ChatGPT
LGTM!
This patch sets the `review_comment_lgtm` flag to false, which will prevent the bot from automatically commenting "LGTM" on pull requests. This seems like a reasonable change.
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by ChatGPT --> |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | typescript | 5 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -212,7 +288,8 @@ export const codeReview = async (
continue
}
next_review_ids = patch_ids
- if (!options.review_comment_lgtm && response.includes('LGTM')) {
+ // if the response contains LGTM (case insensitive), then skip commenting
+ if (!options.review_comment_lgtm... | :robot: ChatGPT
The code looks good. However, the regular expression used to match "LGTM" is case-insensitive, which may result in false positives if there are other words that contain "lgtm". Consider using a more specific regular expression or checking for an exact match of "LGTM".
<!-- This is an auto-generated co... |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | others | 6 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -26,4 +26,4 @@ jobs:
OPENAI_API_KEY: ${{ secrets.OPENAI_API_KEY }}
with:
debug: true
- review_comment_lgtm: true
+ review_comment_lgtm: false | :robot: ChatGPT
This patch changes the `review_comment_lgtm` flag from `true` to `false`. This means that the LGTM (Looks Good To Me) comment will not be automatically added to the pull request when the review is approved.
LGTM!
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by ChatGPT --> |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | others | 6 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
# ChatGPT based PR reviewer and summarizer
+
+
## Overview
This [ChatGPT](https://platform.openai.com/docs/guides/chat) based GitHub Action provides a summary, release notes and review of pull requests. The prompts have been tuned for concise response. To prevent excess... | :robot: ChatGPT
This patch adds an AI image to the README.md file. No bug risk or improvement suggestion found.
LGTM!
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by ChatGPT --> |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | others | 6 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -173,7 +175,6 @@ Set `debug: true` in the workflow file to enable debug mode, which will show the
### Special Thanks
-This GitHub Action is based on
+This GitHub Action is based on
[ChatGPT Action](https://github.com/unsafecoerce/chatgpt-pr-reviewer)
by [Tao He](https://github.com/sighingnow). | :robot: ChatGPT
This patch removes an unnecessary line break. No bug risk or improvement suggestion found.
LGTM!
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by ChatGPT --> |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | typescript | 6 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -75,6 +75,7 @@ export class Inputs {
system_message: string
title: string
description: string
+ summary: string
filename: string
file_content: string
file_diff: string | :robot: ChatGPT
This patch modifies the `Inputs` class to add a new field called `summary`. This change looks good and acceptable. LGTM!
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by ChatGPT --> |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | typescript | 6 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -85,6 +86,7 @@ export class Inputs {
system_message = '',
title = '',
description = '',
+ summary = '',
filename = '',
file_content = '',
file_diff = '', | :robot: ChatGPT
This patch modifies the constructor of the `Inputs` class to include the new `summary` field. This change looks good and acceptable. LGTM!
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by ChatGPT --> |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | typescript | 6 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -94,6 +96,7 @@ export class Inputs {
this.system_message = system_message
this.title = title
this.description = description
+ this.summary = summary
this.filename = filename
this.file_content = file_content
this.file_diff = file_diff | :robot: ChatGPT
This patch modifies the constructor of the `Inputs` class to set the value of the new `summary` field. This change looks good and acceptable. LGTM!
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by ChatGPT --> |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | typescript | 6 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -114,6 +117,9 @@ export class Inputs {
if (this.description) {
content = content.replace('$description', this.description)
}
+ if (this.summary) {
+ content = content.replace('$summary', this.summary)
+ }
if (this.filename) {
content = content.replace('$filename', this.filenam... | :robot: ChatGPT
This patch modifies the `render` method of the `Inputs` class to handle the new `summary` field. This change looks good and acceptable. LGTM!
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by ChatGPT --> |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | typescript | 6 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -147,7 +153,7 @@ export class Options {
review_comment_lgtm = false,
path_filters: string[] | null = null,
system_message = '',
- temperature = '0.2'
+ temperature = '0.0'
) {
this.debug = debug
this.chatgpt_reverse_proxy = chatgpt_reverse_proxy | :robot: ChatGPT
This patch modifies the `Options` class to set the default value of the `temperature` field to 0.0 instead of 0.2. This change looks good and acceptable. LGTM!
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by ChatGPT --> |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | typescript | 6 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -117,17 +117,104 @@ export const codeReview = async (
if (files_to_review.length > 0) {
const commenter: Commenter = new Commenter()
- const [, review_begin_ids] = await bot.chat(
- prompts.render_review_beginning(inputs),
- {}
- )
- let next_review_ids = review_begin_ids
-
+ // Summa... | :robot: ChatGPT
This patch adds a new feature to summarize the diff and generate release notes using ChatGPT. The code looks good, but it would be better to add some error handling for the case when `inputs.description` is undefined. Also, it would be helpful to add some comments to explain the purpose of each section... |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | typescript | 6 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -175,17 +262,6 @@ export const codeReview = async (
} else {
next_review_ids = review_diff_ids
}
-
- // summarize diff
- const [summarize_resp, summarize_diff_ids] = await bot.chat(
- prompts.render_summarize_file_diff(inputs),
- next_summari... | :robot: ChatGPT
This patch removes the code that summarizes the diff for each file. It seems like this is intentional and part of a larger change to move the diff summarization to a separate stage. The code looks good.
LGTM!
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by ChatGPT --> |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | typescript | 6 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -232,76 +308,10 @@ export const codeReview = async (
}
}
}
- // final summary
- const [summarize_final_response, summarize_final_response_ids] =
- await bot.chat(prompts.render_summarize(inputs), next_summarize_ids)
- if (!summarize_final_response) {
- core.info('summarize: no... | :robot: ChatGPT
This patch removes the final summary and release notes generation code from the `codeReview` function. It seems like this is intentional and part of a larger change to move the diff summarization to a separate stage. The code looks good.
LGTM!
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by ChatGPT --> |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | javascript | 4 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -26762,7 +26762,7 @@ var ChatGPTUnofficialProxyAPI = class {
constructor(opts) {
const {
accessToken,
- apiReverseProxyUrl = "https://chat.duti.tech/api/conversation",
+ apiReverseProxyUrl = "https://bypass.duti.tech/api/conversation",
model = "text-davinci-002-render-sha",
deb... | :robot: ChatGPT
LGTM! The change seems reasonable and does not introduce any new issues.
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by ChatGPT --> |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | javascript | 4 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -28663,15 +28663,17 @@ class Inputs {
system_message;
title;
description;
+ summary;
filename;
file_content;
file_diff;
patch;
diff;
- constructor(system_message = '', title = '', description = '', filename = '', file_content = '', file_diff = '', patch = '', diff = '') ... | :robot: ChatGPT
LGTM! The addition of the `summary` field to the `Inputs` class seems reasonable and does not introduce any new issues.
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by ChatGPT --> |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | javascript | 4 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -28691,6 +28693,9 @@ class Inputs {
if (this.description) {
content = content.replace('$description', this.description);
}
+ if (this.summary) {
+ content = content.replace('$summary', this.summary);
+ }
if (this.filename) {
content = cont... | :robot: ChatGPT
LGTM! The addition of the `summary` field to the `Inputs` class and its replacement in the `content` string seems reasonable and does not introduce any new issues.
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by ChatGPT --> |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | javascript | 4 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -29093,10 +29098,87 @@ const codeReview = async (bot, options, prompts) => {
}
if (files_to_review.length > 0) {
const commenter = new Commenter();
- const [, review_begin_ids] = await bot.chat(prompts.render_review_beginning(inputs), {});
- let next_review_ids = review_begin_ids;
+ ... | :robot: ChatGPT
LGTM! The addition of the summary stage to `codeReview` function that summarizes each file's diff and generates release notes for the PR seems reasonable and does not introduce any new issues.
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by ChatGPT --> |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | javascript | 4 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -29130,14 +29212,6 @@ const codeReview = async (bot, options, prompts) => {
else {
next_review_ids = review_diff_ids;
}
- // summarize diff
- const [summarize_resp, summarize_diff_ids] = await bot.chat(prompts.re... | :robot: ChatGPT
Improvement Suggestion:
It seems that the `summarize diff` stage is removed from the `codeReview` function. It might be useful to keep this stage to provide more detailed information about the changes made in each file.
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by ChatGPT --> |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | javascript | 4 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -29170,68 +29244,9 @@ const codeReview = async (bot, options, prompts) => {
}
}
}
- // final summary
- const [summarize_final_response, summarize_final_response_ids] = await bot.chat(prompts.render_summarize(inputs), next_summarize_ids);
- if (!summarize_fi... | :robot: ChatGPT
Improvement Suggestion:
It seems that the final summary and release notes stages are removed from the `codeReview` function. It might be useful to keep these stages to provide a summary of all changes made in the PR and generate release notes for the PR.
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by Cha... |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | others | 4 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -26,4 +26,3 @@ jobs:
OPENAI_API_KEY: ${{ secrets.OPENAI_API_KEY }}
with:
debug: true | :robot: ChatGPT
Patch review for `.github/workflows/chatgpt-review.yml`:
The patch removes the `review_comment_lgtm` flag from the `with` section of the `chatgpt-review.yml` workflow file. This flag was previously used to automatically add an LGTM comment to pull requests that passed the review process.
This change... |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | typescript | 4 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -75,6 +75,7 @@ export class Inputs {
system_message: string
title: string
description: string
+ summary: string
filename: string
file_content: string
file_diff: string | :robot: ChatGPT
This patch adds a new `summary` field to the `Inputs` class. The changes seem reasonable and necessary for the new stage that was added in this pull request. The addition of the `summary` field will allow the summary of changes made during the code review process to be included in the release notes of ... |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | typescript | 4 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -85,6 +86,7 @@ export class Inputs {
system_message = '',
title = '',
description = '',
+ summary = '',
filename = '',
file_content = '',
file_diff = '', | :robot: ChatGPT
This patch updates the constructor of the `Inputs` class to include the new `summary` field. The changes seem appropriate and necessary for the new stage that was added in this pull request.
LGTM!
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by ChatGPT --> |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | typescript | 4 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -94,6 +96,7 @@ export class Inputs {
this.system_message = system_message
this.title = title
this.description = description
+ this.summary = summary
this.filename = filename
this.file_content = file_content
this.file_diff = file_diff | :robot: ChatGPT
This patch updates the constructor of the `Inputs` class to set the new `summary` field. The changes seem appropriate and necessary for the new stage that was added in this pull request.
LGTM!
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by ChatGPT --> |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | typescript | 4 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -114,6 +117,9 @@ export class Inputs {
if (this.description) {
content = content.replace('$description', this.description)
}
+ if (this.summary) {
+ content = content.replace('$summary', this.summary)
+ }
if (this.filename) {
content = content.replace('$filename', this.filenam... | :robot: ChatGPT
This patch updates the `render` function of the `Inputs` class to include the new `summary` field. The changes seem appropriate and necessary for the new stage that was added in this pull request.
LGTM!
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by ChatGPT --> |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | typescript | 4 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -117,17 +117,104 @@ export const codeReview = async (
if (files_to_review.length > 0) {
const commenter: Commenter = new Commenter()
- const [, review_begin_ids] = await bot.chat(
- prompts.render_review_beginning(inputs),
- {}
- )
- let next_review_ids = review_begin_ids
-
+ // Summa... | :robot: ChatGPT
The patch looks good. However, I suggest breaking down the `codeReview` function into smaller, more focused functions for easier testing and maintenance. Also, use destructuring assignment to simplify object access. Finally, add error handling for all async functions, especially those that interact wit... |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | typescript | 4 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -175,17 +262,6 @@ export const codeReview = async (
} else {
next_review_ids = review_diff_ids
}
-
- // summarize diff
- const [summarize_resp, summarize_diff_ids] = await bot.chat(
- prompts.render_summarize_file_diff(inputs),
- next_summari... | :robot: ChatGPT
The patch looks good. However, I suggest adding a comment explaining why the `summarize_diff` step was removed.
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by ChatGPT --> |
ai-pr-reviewer | github_2023 | typescript | 4 | coderabbitai | github-actions[bot] | @@ -232,76 +308,10 @@ export const codeReview = async (
}
}
}
- // final summary
- const [summarize_final_response, summarize_final_response_ids] =
- await bot.chat(prompts.render_summarize(inputs), next_summarize_ids)
- if (!summarize_final_response) {
- core.info('summarize: no... | :robot: ChatGPT
The patch looks good. However, I suggest adding a comment explaining why the `summarize_final_response` and `release_notes_response` steps were removed.
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment by ChatGPT --> |
yakGPT | github_2023 | typescript | 63 | yakGPT | yakGPT | @@ -16,34 +17,45 @@ export const startRecording = async (router: NextRouter) => {
clearTimeout(get().recorderTimeout);
const { apiKeyAzure, apiKeyAzureRegion } = get();
- let lastTextUpdate = "";
+ let textUpdates: string[] = [];
- const updateText = (text: string, persist: boolean) => {
- // Remove pre... | Ha, great catch, appears I completely overcomplicated this! |
honox | github_2023 | typescript | 252 | honojs | yusukebe | @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ export const Script = (options: Options): any => {
<script
type='module'
async={!!options.async}
- src={`/${scriptInManifest.file}`}
+ src={`${import.meta.env.BASE_URL}${scriptInManifest.file}`} | Should we support without a trailing slash pattern?
```ts
defineConfig({
base: '/subdir' // does not have a trailing slash
})
``` |
honox | github_2023 | typescript | 253 | honojs | yusukebe | @@ -217,18 +217,18 @@ export function islandComponents(options?: IslandComponentsOptions): Plugin {
root = config.root
if (!reactApiImportSource) {
- const tsConfigPath = path.resolve(process.cwd(), 'tsconfig.json')
- const denoJsonPath = path.resolve(process.cwd(), 'deno.json')
- l... | I think this `console.warn()` is okay! |
honox | github_2023 | typescript | 181 | honojs | yusukebe | @@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+import type { FC } from 'hono/jsx'
+import type { Manifest } from 'vite'
+
+type Options = { manifest?: Manifest; prod: boolean } & JSX.IntrinsicElements['link'] | Should `prod` be `prod?`? |
honox | github_2023 | typescript | 176 | honojs | usualoma | @@ -29,20 +29,22 @@ export type ClientOptions = {
*/
triggerHydration?: TriggerHydration
ISLAND_FILES?: Record<string, () => Promise<unknown>>
+ /**
+ * @deprecated
+ */
island_root?: string
}
export const createClient = async (options?: ClientOptions) => {
const FILES = options?.ISLAND_FILES ?... | It has nothing to do with this PR change, In `matchIslandComponentId()`, only `.tsx` matches (`.ts does not), so I think only `.tsx` should be used here as well.
https://github.com/honojs/honox/pull/176/files#diff-4b7b8acce4bb320abe3a28d1bb85d7ad346253af647225df7e62d19891192a27R25 |
honox | github_2023 | typescript | 171 | honojs | usualoma | @@ -52,6 +52,18 @@ function isComponentName(name: string) {
return /^[A-Z][A-Z0-9]*[a-z][A-Za-z0-9]*$/.test(name)
}
+/**
+ * Matches when id is the filename of Island component
+ *
+ * @param id - The id to match
+ * @returns The result object if id is matched or null
+ */
+export function matchIslandComponentId(... | Is it intended that there is no `/` under `routes` ? If not, I think it should be added.
```suggestion
/(\/islands\/.+?\.tsx$)|(\/routes\/.*\_[a-zA-Z0-9[-]+\.island\.tsx$)|(\/routes\/.*\/\$[a-zA-Z0-9[-]+\.tsx$)/
```
We might also want to take this opportunity to review our existing regular expressions as we... |
honox | github_2023 | typescript | 168 | honojs | yusukebe | @@ -62,6 +63,11 @@ export const createApp = <E extends Env>(options: BaseServerOptions<E>): Hono<E>
const app = options.app ?? new Hono()
const trailingSlash = options.trailingSlash ?? false
+ // Share context by AsyncLocalStorage
+ app.use(async function ShareContext(c, next) { | This is cool! Only a few code can adapt `AsyncLocalStorage` to a Hono app. |
honox | github_2023 | typescript | 163 | honojs | yusukebe | @@ -29,27 +29,34 @@ import {
memberExpression,
importDeclaration,
importSpecifier,
+ exportNamedDeclaration,
+ exportSpecifier,
} from '@babel/types'
import { parse as parseJsonc } from 'jsonc-parser'
// eslint-disable-next-line node/no-extraneous-import
import type { Plugin } from 'vite'
-function add... | I think the component name is `/^[A-Z][A-Za-z0-9]+/`. What do you think? |
honox | github_2023 | typescript | 151 | honojs | yusukebe | @@ -197,25 +197,46 @@ export type IslandComponentsOptions = {
isIsland: IsIsland
}
+function getIslandComponentName(
+ root: string,
+ id: string,
+ options?: IslandComponentsOptions
+): string | null {
+ const defaultIsIsland: IsIsland = (id) => {
+ const islandDirectoryPath = path.join(root, 'app')
+ ... | I think `?not-island` or `?inside-island` is better than `?no-island`. How about you? |
honox | github_2023 | typescript | 81 | honojs | yusukebe | @@ -30,10 +30,80 @@ export default WrappedBadge;`
`const AsyncComponentOriginal = async function () {
return <h1>Hello</h1>;
};
-const WrappedAsyncComponent = async function (props) {
+const WrappedAsyncComponent = function (props) {
return import.meta.env.SSR ? <honox-island component-name="AsyncComponen... | It's good to test the utility function too! |
honox | github_2023 | others | 67 | honojs | yusukebe | @@ -466,6 +466,25 @@ export const POST = createRoute(zValidator('form', schema), async (c) => {
})
```
+Alternatively, you can use a `_middleware.(ts|tsx)` file in a directory to have that middleware applied to the current route, as well as all child routes. Middleware is ran in the order that it is listed within t... | I know it's a small detail, but wouldn't `/app/_middleware.ts` be better here?
|
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 468 | CHERIoT-Platform | rmn30 | @@ -863,22 +863,53 @@ __cheriot_minimum_stack(0x90) ssize_t
return cap->quota;
}
-__cheriot_minimum_stack(0xd0) int heap_quarantine_empty()
+__cheriot_minimum_stack(0xd0) int heap_quarantine_flush(Timeout *timeout)
{
STACK_CHECK(0xd0); | Aside: now that we have `__cheriot_minimum_stack__` can we introduce a variant of this macro that doesn't need repeat the stack size? |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 468 | CHERIoT-Platform | rmn30 | @@ -291,17 +291,36 @@ ssize_t __cheri_compartment("allocator")
heap_quota_remaining(AllocatorCapability heapCapability);
/**
- * Block until the quarantine is empty.
+ * Try to empty the quarantine and defragment the heap.
*
- * This should be used only in testing, to place the system in a quiesced
- * state. ... | ```suggestion
* This will start a revocation sweep and then try to empty the quarantine. In
``` |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 468 | CHERIoT-Platform | rmn30 | @@ -291,17 +291,36 @@ ssize_t __cheri_compartment("allocator")
heap_quota_remaining(AllocatorCapability heapCapability);
/**
- * Block until the quarantine is empty.
+ * Try to empty the quarantine and defragment the heap.
*
- * This should be used only in testing, to place the system in a quiesced
- * state. ... | Could mark this deprecated and add a new version called `heap_quarantine_flush_block_forever`? Hopefully that's a sufficiently scary name to discourage inappropriate use and also consistent with naming convention? |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 468 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf | @@ -863,22 +863,54 @@ __cheriot_minimum_stack(0x90) ssize_t
return cap->quota;
}
-__cheriot_minimum_stack(0xd0) int heap_quarantine_empty()
+__cheriot_minimum_stack(0xd0) int heap_quarantine_flush(Timeout *timeout)
{
STACK_CHECK(0xd0);
- LockGuard g{lock};
- while (gm->heapQuarantineSize > 0)
+
+ if (!check_tim... | This probably wants to be repeated, like `while (gm->quarantine_dequeue()) { ; }`, possibly with a notion of time elapsing, because there may be lots of (that is, more than 4) objects for us to remove from quarantine before we need to kick and wait for any revocation passes to take place. We should re-check `gm->heapQ... |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 468 | CHERIoT-Platform | rmn30 | @@ -863,22 +863,54 @@ __cheriot_minimum_stack(0x90) ssize_t
return cap->quota;
}
-__cheriot_minimum_stack(0xd0) int heap_quarantine_empty()
+__cheriot_minimum_stack(0xd0) int heap_quarantine_flush(Timeout *timeout)
{
STACK_CHECK(0xd0);
- LockGuard g{lock};
- while (gm->heapQuarantineSize > 0)
+
+ if (!check_tim... | This sequence could be extracted as a method on `LockGuard` so that this would become `if (!g.unlock_temporarily(timeout, 1)) return -ETIMEDOUT;`. Do we have other instances of this pattern? |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 468 | CHERIoT-Platform | rmn30 | @@ -305,27 +333,8 @@ namespace
revoker.system_bg_revoker_kick();
- if constexpr (Revocation::Revoker::IsAsynchronous)
- {
- wait_for_background_revoker(
- timeout, needsRevocation->waitingEpoch, g);
- }
- else
- {
- // Drop and reacquire the lock while yielding.
- // ... | Should this check the return value? |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 468 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf | @@ -291,17 +291,36 @@ ssize_t __cheri_compartment("allocator")
heap_quota_remaining(AllocatorCapability heapCapability);
/**
- * Block until the quarantine is empty.
+ * Try to empty the quarantine and defragment the heap.
*
- * This should be used only in testing, to place the system in a quiesced
- * state. ... | I don't think it's a certainty?
```suggestion
* allocations, then calling this function will likely reduce fragmentation.
``` |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 468 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf | @@ -291,17 +291,42 @@ ssize_t __cheri_compartment("allocator")
heap_quota_remaining(AllocatorCapability heapCapability);
/**
- * Block until the quarantine is empty.
+ * Try to empty the quarantine and defragment the heap.
*
- * This should be used only in testing, to place the system in a quiesced
- * state. ... | Since `heap_quarantine_flush` is now one-pass, this should also be guaranteed to terminate, now... or should it loop around `_flush`? |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 468 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf | @@ -216,20 +217,44 @@ namespace
uint32_t epoch,
LockGuard<decltype(lock)> &g,
T &r = revoker)
- requires(!Revocation::SupportsInterruptNotification<T>)
+ requires(!R... | At a glance, this implementation looks to be the same as the above? |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 476 | CHERIoT-Platform | davidchisnall | @@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ namespace ds::pointer
__always_inline Pointer<T> &operator=(Pointer const &p)
{
- ref = p.ref;
+ ref = (T *){p.ref}; | Doesn't this trigger a clang-tidy warning about C-style casts? |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | others | 250 | CHERIoT-Platform | rmn30 | @@ -223,6 +224,29 @@ For Ubuntu, you can do:
# apt install xmake
```
+### Installing u2futils
+
+If you are working with Sonata, you will need to convert the ELF files that the linker produces to [USB Flashing Format (UF2)](https://github.com/microsoft/uf2) format. | ```suggestion
If you are working with Sonata, you will need to convert the ELF files that the linker produces to [USB Flashing Format (UF2)](https://github.com/microsoft/uf2).
``` |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | others | 250 | CHERIoT-Platform | rmn30 | @@ -352,3 +376,99 @@ issions are:
Test runner: Global(0x0)
...
```
+
+Running on Sonata
+-----------------
+
+The Sonata board from lowRISC is an FPGA prototyping platform designed specifically to work with the CHERIoT Ibex.
+If you have installed a [release of their system firmware](https://github.com/lowRISC/sonat... | I don't think it's a good idea to connect to all of them at the same time. I think one might be the debugger and actually halts CPU or something.
```suggestion
If you are unsure which of Sonata's serial ports is the correct one, you can connect your serial console to each of them in turn and see which produces output... |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | others | 235 | CHERIoT-Platform | HU90m | @@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+#!/bin/sh
+
+FIRMWARE_ELF=$1
+
+SCRIPT_DIRECTORY="$(dirname "$(realpath "$0")")"
+. ${SCRIPT_DIRECTORY}/includes/helper_find_llvm_install.sh
+
+OBJCOPY=$(find_llvm_tool_required llvm-objcopy)
+
+command -v uf2conv > /dev/null
+if [ ! $? ] ; then
+ echo "uf2conv not found. On macOS / Linux systems wit... | ```suggestion
try_copy /run/media/$USER/
``` |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | others | 235 | CHERIoT-Platform | HU90m | @@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+#!/bin/sh | ```suggestion
#!/usr/bin/env sh
set -ue
```
Mainly care about `set -ue`, `env` is just a preference. |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 201 | CHERIoT-Platform | rmn30 | @@ -335,7 +336,13 @@ debug_log_message_write(const char *context,
DebugPrinter printer;
printer.write("\x1b[35m");
printer.write(context);
+#if 0 | Make make this a compile time option?
```suggestion
#if defined(DEBUG_SHOW_THREAD_ID)
``` |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 201 | CHERIoT-Platform | rmn30 | @@ -114,6 +116,11 @@ namespace
return schedTStack;
}
+ static bool any_ready()
+ {
+ return priorityMap != 0;
+ }
+
/**
* When yielding inside the scheduler compartment, we almost always want | While you're here could you change this comment to fix #56 ? |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 201 | CHERIoT-Platform | rmn30 | @@ -28,34 +28,72 @@ namespace
class Timer final : private TimerCore
{
+ inline static uint64_t lastTickTime = 0;
+ inline static uint32_t accumulatedTickError = 0;
+
public:
static void interrupt_setup()
{
static_assert(TIMERCYCLES_PER_TICK <= UINT32_MAX,
"Cycles per tick ... | This is worthy of some comment. I think it is calculating error by assuming elapsed should be a multiples of TIMERCYCLES_PER_TICK and, if less than a tick has elapsed, it rounds up by one? |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 201 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf-msr | @@ -26,36 +26,81 @@ namespace
IsTimer<TimerCore>,
"Platform's timer implementation does not meet the required interface");
+ /**
+ * Timer interface. Provides generic timer functionality to the scheduler,
+ * wrapping the platform's timer device.
+ */
class Timer final : private TimerCore
{
+ inline ... | Expand comment to match code and maybe write something to make those of us stuck in the 1980s feel better about clearing the timer? Something like... "... no threads blocked with a timeout and no priority-peers of the current thread such that we'd need to timeslice the CPU. The timer can be re-enabled if this single ... |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | others | 201 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf-msr | @@ -970,7 +970,13 @@ __Z13thread_id_getv:
// Load the trusted stack pointer into a register that we will clobber in
// the next instruction when we load the thread ID.
cspecialr ca0, mtdc
+ //cgettag a1, ca0
+ // If this is a null pointer, don't try to dereference it and report that
+ // we ar... | Do you want this to be commented out? |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 201 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf-msr | @@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ static inline BaseType_t xTaskCheckForTimeOut(TimeOut_t *pxTimeOut,
static inline void vTaskDelay(const TickType_t xTicksToDelay)
{
struct Timeout timeout = {0, xTicksToDelay};
- thread_sleep(&timeout);
+ thread_sleep(&timeout, 0); | I don't think that's the semantics of `vTaskDelay`. https://www.freertos.org/a00127.html makes it sound like it's supposed to guarantee that time elapses. |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 201 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf-msr | @@ -72,6 +117,39 @@ namespace
break;
}
}
+ if (!Thread::any_ready())
+ {
+ for (Thread *iter = Thread::waitingList; iter;) | I think I'd prefer two `waitingList`-s, one for time elapsing and one for yielding, so that we wouldn't have to do this kind of two-pass rummaging and discrimination. I suppose with our thread counts it doesn't hugely matter, but still. |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 201 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf-msr | @@ -72,6 +117,39 @@ namespace
break;
}
}
+ if (!Thread::any_ready())
+ {
+ for (Thread *iter = Thread::waitingList; iter;)
+ {
+ if (iter->is_yielding())
+ {
+ Debug::log("Woke thread {} {} cycles early",
+ iter->id_get(),
+ int64_t(iter->expiryTime)... | I don't think that's right; I think you want to keep scanning the queue for the first yielding thread, not bail if the head of the queue isn't yielding. |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | others | 201 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf-msr | @@ -38,6 +38,21 @@ class StandardClint : private utils::NoCopyNoMove
2 * sizeof(uint32_t));
}
+ static uint64_t time()
+ {
+ /// the low 32 bits | Eh? |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 201 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf-msr | @@ -23,6 +23,17 @@ typedef struct
[[cheri::interrupt_state(disabled)]] SystickReturn __cheri_compartment("sched")
thread_systemtick_get(void);
+enum ThreadSleepFlags : uint32_t
+{
+ /**
+ * Sleep for up to the specified timeout, but wake early if there are no
+ * other runnable threads. This allows a high-prio... | ```suggestion
* other threads runnable or blocked with earlier timeouts.
* This allows a high-priority thread to yield for
```
I'm trying to capture the difference between "wake as soon as the system idles within the next N ticks" (which would be the "traverse the waiting queue until we found a yielding threa... |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 201 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf-msr | @@ -419,14 +435,17 @@ SystickReturn __cheri_compartment("sched") thread_systemtick_get()
}
__cheriot_minimum_stack(0x80) int __cheri_compartment("sched")
- thread_sleep(Timeout *timeout)
+ thread_sleep(Timeout *timeout, uint32_t flags)
{
STACK_CHECK(0x80);
if (!check_timeout_pointer(timeout))
{
return -... | Nit: could you `ifdef 0` this or cut down the number of slashes so that it doesn't look like a doxygen-style comment? |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 201 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf-msr | @@ -616,7 +647,12 @@ namespace
uint8_t priority;
/// The original priority level for this thread. This never changes.
const uint8_t OriginalPriority;
- ThreadState state;
+ ThreadState state : 2;
+ /**
+ * If the thread is yielding, it may be scheduled before its timeout
+ * expires, as long as no ... | I might leave off the "as long as..." part here and just point at the docs for `ThreadSleepNoEarlyWake` or the comment down in the actual wake code. |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 201 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf-msr | @@ -26,36 +26,96 @@ namespace
IsTimer<TimerCore>,
"Platform's timer implementation does not meet the required interface");
+ /**
+ * Timer interface. Provides generic timer functionality to the scheduler,
+ * wrapping the platform's timer device.
+ */
class Timer final : private TimerCore
{
+ inline ... | ```suggestion
* threads runnable or sleeping with earlier timeouts.
``` |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 201 | CHERIoT-Platform | rmn30 | @@ -26,36 +26,96 @@ namespace
IsTimer<TimerCore>,
"Platform's timer implementation does not meet the required interface");
+ /**
+ * Timer interface. Provides generic timer functionality to the scheduler,
+ * wrapping the platform's timer device.
+ */
class Timer final : private TimerCore
{
+ inline ... | @davidchisnall if the waiting list is non-empty *and* the current thread has peers I think this will set the timer for the next expiry time. Doesn't that mean the current thread could get more than one quantum? |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | others | 225 | CHERIoT-Platform | rmn30 | @@ -352,7 +315,19 @@ struct DebugFormatArgumentAdaptor<CHERI::PermissionSet>
construct(CHERI::PermissionSet value)
{
return {static_cast<uintptr_t>(value.as_raw()),
- DebugFormatArgument::PermissionSet};
+ DebugFormatArgumentKind::DebugFormatArgumentPermissionSet};
+ }
+};
+
+/**
+ * Null point... | Curious why this is required? |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 225 | CHERIoT-Platform | rmn30 | @@ -0,0 +1,138 @@
+#pragma once
+#include <__debug.h>
+#include <__macro_map.h>
+
+#ifndef __cplusplus
+
+/**
+ * Helper macro to convert the type of an argument to the corresponding
+ * `DebugFormatArgument` value.
+ *
+ * Should not be used directly.
+ */
+# define CHERIOT_DEBUG_MAP_ARGUMENT(x) ... | Maybe prefix with `_` or something to discourage direct use? |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | others | 226 | CHERIoT-Platform | rmn30 | @@ -13,9 +13,6 @@
.p2align 2
.type start,@function
start:
- cjal .Lregs_clear
- // The common register clearing function will not zero these registers.
- zeroRegisters ra, sp, gp, a0
// At this point all registers are cleared. | ```suggestion
// HW should have initialised all general purpose registers to NULL
// but we don't rely on that. Most will be cleared below before jumping to loader.
``` |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 311 | CHERIoT-Platform | sleffler | @@ -61,23 +61,41 @@ using _Bool = bool;
#define __section(x) __attribute__((section(x)))
#define __alloc_size(x) __attribute__((alloc_size(x)))
#define __alloc_align(x) __attribute__((alloc_align(x)))
-#define __cheri_callback __attribute__((cheri_ccallback))
#if __has_attribute(cheriot_minimum_stack)
# define __c... | <pre>__CHERIOT_BAREMETAL__</pre> or <pre>_CHERIOT_BAREMETAL_</pre> (I originally used the latter) |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | others | 185 | CHERIoT-Platform | rmn30 | @@ -27,3 +27,99 @@ This is the kind of isolation that device drivers typically provide in operating
Note in addition that we've added one more attribute to the function exposed here: `[[cheri::interrupt_state(disabled)]]`.
This means that the uart compartment will write the entire string to the UART, so two different... | ```suggestion
We do this by writing a Rego module that encapsulates our policy.
``` |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | others | 185 | CHERIoT-Platform | rmn30 | @@ -27,3 +27,99 @@ This is the kind of isolation that device drivers typically provide in operating
Note in addition that we've added one more attribute to the function exposed here: `[[cheri::interrupt_state(disabled)]]`.
This means that the uart compartment will write the entire string to the UART, so two different... | ```suggestion
This uses `-b` to find the board description file and `-j` the report that the linker generated during the build.
The query passed with `-q` asks which compartments or libraries import the UART's MMIO capability.
``` |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 174 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf-msr | @@ -289,7 +289,13 @@ namespace displacement_proxy
struct __packed __aligned(MallocAlignment)
MChunkHeader
{
- static constexpr size_t OwnerIDWidth = 14;
+ /**
+ * Each chunk has a 16-bit metadata field that is used to store a small
+ * bitfield and the owner ID in the remaining bits. This is the space not
+ * co... | For a follow-up PR, perhaps: do we ever actually check that the `uint16_t` owner IDs we're passing around fit in this width? Maybe just in debug builds? |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 174 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf-msr | @@ -301,8 +307,15 @@ MChunkHeader
/// The unique identifier of the allocator.
uint16_t ownerID : OwnerIDWidth;
- bool isPrevInUse : 1;
- bool isCurrInUse : 1;
+ /**
+ * Is this a sealed object? If so, it should be exempted from free in
+ * `heap_free_all` because deallocation requires consensus between... | Probably also worth a quick comment that this, like `isCurrInUse`, effectively is a _type tag_ on the body of the chunk, indicating that it is a `struct SObjStruct`.
By that token, it'd be good explicitly zero the bit in `mspace_free` (or maybe `quarantine_pending_push`) and to teach the `ok_free_chunk` consistency ... |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | c | 162 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf-msr | @@ -88,3 +88,9 @@ void *__cheri_libcall memset(void *dst0, int c0, size_t length)
} while (--t != 0);
return (dst0);
}
+
+void __cheri_libcall explicit_bzero(void *s, size_t n)
+{
+ memset(s, 0, n); | Does this result in an extra call/return within the library? |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | others | 161 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf-msr | @@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+#pragma once
+#include "compartment-macros.h"
+#include <platform/concepts/entropy.h>
+#include <ds/xoroshiro.h>
+#include <riscvreg.h>
+#include <interrupt.h>
+#include <fail-simulator-on-error.h>
+
+DECLARE_AND_DEFINE_INTERRUPT_CAPABILITY(
+ RevokerInterruptEntropy, I... | I am pretty sure you didn't mean `(interrupts & 0xff) >> 8`.
```suggestion
for (uint32_t i = 0 ; i<((interrupts & 0xff00) >> 8); i++)
``` |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 161 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf-msr | @@ -85,7 +142,15 @@ namespace ds::xoroshiro
*
* Parameters from https://prng.di.unimi.it/xoroshiro128plus.c .
*/
- using P128R64 = detail::XorOshiro<uint64_t, uint64_t, 24, 16, 37>;
+ using P128R64 = detail::XorOshiro<uint64_t,
+ uint64_t,
+ 2... | "Let's see... types, small numbers... omg". I trust that those are the right big numbers. |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 161 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf-msr | @@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+#pragma once
+#include <array>
+#include <concepts>
+#include <cstdint>
+
+/**
+ * Concept for an Ethernet adaptor.
+ */
+template<typename T>
+concept IsEntropySource = requires(T source)
+{
+ /**
+ * Must export a flag indicating whether this is a cryptographically
+ * secure random number.
+ */
... | Requiring distillation in the application-facing source is probably fine, but I'm not sure it's worth it if one starts stacking/pooling sources a la Fortuna. |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | others | 161 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf-msr | @@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+#pragma once
+#include "compartment-macros.h"
+#include <platform/concepts/entropy.h>
+#include <ds/xoroshiro.h>
+#include <riscvreg.h>
+#include <interrupt.h>
+#include <fail-simulator-on-error.h>
+
+DECLARE_AND_DEFINE_INTERRUPT_CAPABILITY(
+ RevokerInterruptEntropy, I... | Huh! That's kind of surprising. Maybe something like https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3610295 is worth adding to the FPGA image? But either way, this looks fine for testing and demo purposes. |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 155 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf-msr | @@ -53,34 +178,272 @@ xSemaphoreCreateCounting(UBaseType_t uxMaxCount, UBaseType_t uxInitialCount)
}
/**
- * Delete a heap-allocated semaphore.
+ * Create a heap-allocated binary semaphore.
+ *
+ * Binary semaphores are implemented as counting semaphores with a maximum count
+ * of 1.
+ */
+__always_inline static i... | Not yet supported? |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 155 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf-msr | @@ -53,34 +178,272 @@ xSemaphoreCreateCounting(UBaseType_t uxMaxCount, UBaseType_t uxInitialCount)
}
/**
- * Delete a heap-allocated semaphore.
+ * Create a heap-allocated binary semaphore.
+ *
+ * Binary semaphores are implemented as counting semaphores with a maximum count
+ * of 1.
+ */
+__always_inline static i... | This probably deserves the same comment about racing as below, with the (anti)caveat that an answer of "this thread" _is_ stable. |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 155 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf-msr | @@ -44,7 +169,7 @@ __always_inline static inline SemaphoreHandle_t
xSemaphoreCreateCounting(UBaseType_t uxMaxCount, UBaseType_t uxInitialCount)
{
SemaphoreHandle_t semaphore =
- (SemaphoreHandle_t)malloc(sizeof(struct CountingSemaphoreState));
+ (SemaphoreHandle_t)malloc(sizeof(SemaphoreHandle_t)); | Do you really mean `sizeof(SemaphoreHandle_t)`?
```suggestion
(SemaphoreHandle_t)malloc(sizeof(StaticSemaphore_t));
``` |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 155 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf-msr | @@ -1,18 +1,141 @@
#pragma once
+/**
+ * FreeRTOS semaphore compatibility layer. This maps FreeRTOS semaphore types
+ * to their CHERIoT RTOS equivalents.
+ *
+ * There is some overhead from dynamic dispatch that can be avoided if only one
+ * of the FreeRTOS semaphore types needs to be supported in a particular
+ * ... | While I don't object to these `EXPOSE`-less `define`s, are they doing anything that `defined(CHERIOT_EXPOSE_...)` can't? |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 155 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf-msr | @@ -53,34 +178,272 @@ xSemaphoreCreateCounting(UBaseType_t uxMaxCount, UBaseType_t uxInitialCount)
}
/**
- * Delete a heap-allocated semaphore.
+ * Create a heap-allocated binary semaphore.
+ *
+ * Binary semaphores are implemented as counting semaphores with a maximum count
+ * of 1.
+ */
+__always_inline static i... | As above? |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 155 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf-msr | @@ -53,34 +178,272 @@ xSemaphoreCreateCounting(UBaseType_t uxMaxCount, UBaseType_t uxInitialCount)
}
/**
- * Delete a heap-allocated semaphore.
+ * Create a heap-allocated binary semaphore.
+ *
+ * Binary semaphores are implemented as counting semaphores with a maximum count
+ * of 1.
+ */
+__always_inline static i... | Third time's the charm? |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | others | 142 | CHERIoT-Platform | rmn30 | @@ -777,7 +777,7 @@ exception_entry_asm:
// Restore the stack pointer. All other spilled values are spilled there.
clc csp, TrustedStackFrame_offset_csp(ct1)
// Update the current frame offset.
- csw t2, TrustedStack_offset_frameoffset(ctp)
+ csh t2, TrustedStack_offs... | Was this previously a bug where this write was overflowing into the padding? |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | others | 427 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf | @@ -1055,27 +1119,32 @@ namespace CHERI
* all other cases.
*/
template<typename U>
- bool is_subset_of(Capability<U> other)
+ bool is_subset_of(Capability<U, IsSealed> other)
{
return __builtin_cheri_subset_test(other.ptr, ptr);
}
/**
* Seal this capability with the given key.
*/
- ... | Do you want to `requires IsSealed` here? |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | others | 427 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf | @@ -1055,27 +1119,32 @@ namespace CHERI
* all other cases.
*/
template<typename U>
- bool is_subset_of(Capability<U> other)
+ bool is_subset_of(Capability<U, IsSealed> other)
{
return __builtin_cheri_subset_test(other.ptr, ptr);
}
/**
* Seal this capability with the given key.
*/
- ... | Do you mean `!defined` here as everywhere else? I don't see `CHERIOT_NO_SEALED_POINTERS` documented anywhere, so I'm not quite sure what it's supposed to be doing... |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | others | 427 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf | @@ -132,8 +132,8 @@ namespace
/**
* Append a capability.
*/
- template<typename T>
- __always_inline void append(CHERI::Capability<T> capability)
+ template<typename T, bool IsSealed>
+ __always_inline void append(CHERI::Capability<T, IsSealed> capability) | I wonder if it's worth a check and warning if the sealed state of the capability differs from the static annotation? |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | others | 427 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf | @@ -1055,27 +1119,32 @@ namespace CHERI
* all other cases.
*/
template<typename U>
- bool is_subset_of(Capability<U> other)
+ bool is_subset_of(Capability<U, IsSealed> other)
{
return __builtin_cheri_subset_test(other.ptr, ptr);
}
/**
* Seal this capability with the given key.
*/
- ... | The lack of write-back to `ptr` is a breaking change. The `[[nodiscard]]` is nice, and I think you've updated all the call-sites in tree, but... some more words in the commentary might be useful and an announcement on the blog or signal group or something could be good, too. |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | cpp | 427 | CHERIoT-Platform | nwf | @@ -40,7 +41,10 @@ struct AllocatorCapabilityState
uintptr_t reserved[2];
};
-struct SObjStruct;
+/**
+ * Type for allocator capabilities.
+ */
+typedef CHERI_SEALED(struct AllocatorCapabilityState *) AllocatorCapability; | Why this wasn't a `typedef` far longer ago... sorry. |
cheriot-rtos | github_2023 | others | 460 | CHERIoT-Platform | davidchisnall | @@ -10,7 +10,8 @@ riscv32-unknown-unknown
-fshort-wchar
-nostdinc
-fomit-frame-pointer
--fno-builtin
+-fno-builtin-setjmp
+-fno-builtin-longjmp | These are only used for clangd, so don't matter too much. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.