tools: Bring back memap output by default #6155

geky · 2018-02-21T19:38:29Z

Back due to popular demand (and because #5929 accidentally ended up in a patch release).

Now compile jobs print both the table and bars if available:

$ mbed compile -m K64F -t GCC_ARM
Building project mbed-os-prettyoutput (ARCH_PRO, GCC_ARM)
Scan: .
Scan: env
Scan: mbed
Scan: FEATURE_LWIP
Link: mbed-os-02
Elf2Bin: mbed-os-02
+---------------------------------+-------+-------+------+
| Module                          | .text | .data | .bss |
+---------------------------------+-------+-------+------+
| [fill]                          |   653 |    10 |   40 |
| [lib]/c.a                       | 25404 |  2208 |   56 |
| [lib]/gcc.a                     |  5508 |     0 |    0 |
| [lib]/m.a                       |  6735 |     1 |    0 |
| [lib]/misc                      |   296 |    12 |   28 |
| drivers/BusOut.o                |   388 |     0 |    0 |
| drivers/CAN.o                   |   442 |     0 |    0 |
| drivers/InterruptIn.o           |    20 |     0 |    0 |
| drivers/RawSerial.o             |   500 |     0 |    0 |
| drivers/Serial.o                |   144 |     0 |    0 |
| drivers/SerialBase.o            |   768 |     0 |    0 |
| drivers/Ticker.o                |   368 |     0 |    0 |
| drivers/Timeout.o               |   136 |     0 |    0 |
| drivers/Timer.o                 |   488 |     0 |    0 |
| drivers/TimerEvent.o            |   280 |     0 |    0 |
| drivers/UARTSerial.o            |   188 |     0 |    0 |
| events/equeue                   |   576 |     0 |  101 |
| features/frameworks             | 11491 |    69 |  420 |
| hal/mbed_critical_section_api.o |   210 |     0 |    2 |
| hal/mbed_gpio.o                 |   382 |     0 |    0 |
| hal/mbed_pinmap_common.o        |   374 |     0 |    0 |
| hal/mbed_sleep_manager.o        |   202 |     0 |    2 |
| hal/mbed_ticker_api.o           |  2068 |     0 |    0 |
| hal/mbed_us_ticker_api.o        |    76 |     4 |   64 |
| main.o                          |  1729 |     4 |  205 |
| platform/FileHandle.o           |   180 |     0 |    0 |
| platform/mbed_alloc_wrappers.o  |   216 |     0 |    0 |
| platform/mbed_assert.o          |    89 |     0 |    0 |
| platform/mbed_board.o           |   418 |     0 |    0 |
| platform/mbed_critical.o        |   383 |     0 |    4 |
| platform/mbed_error.o           |    56 |     0 |    1 |
| platform/mbed_retarget.o        |  3122 |   260 |  144 |
| platform/mbed_wait_api_rtos.o   |   148 |     0 |    0 |
| rtos/TARGET_CORTEX              | 18409 |   168 | 6061 |
| rtos/Thread.o                   |    56 |     0 |    4 |
| targets/TARGET_NXP              |  5793 |     4 |  244 |
| Subtotals                       | 88296 |  2740 | 7376 |
+---------------------------------+-------+-------+------+
Total Static RAM memory (data + bss): 10116 bytes
Total Flash memory (text + data): 91036 bytes
ROM [||||||||                                            ]  88.9KB/512KB
RAM [|||||||||||||||                                     ]   9.88KB/32KB
Image: BUILD/ARCH_PRO/GCC_ARM/mbed-os-02.bin

related #5929
release patch?
cc @screamerbg, @MarceloSalazar, @theotherjimmy

MarceloSalazar · 2018-02-21T19:45:48Z

@geky thanks
I'm curious why mbed-os is not shown as here:

+------------------+-------+-------+-------+
| Module           | .text | .data |  .bss |
+------------------+-------+-------+-------+
| [fill]           |    62 |     4 |  2513 |
| [lib]/libc.a     | 22434 |  2204 |    56 |
| [lib]/libgcc.a   |  3728 |     0 |     0 |
| [lib]/libm.a     |    88 |     0 |     0 |
| [lib]/libnosys.a |    32 |     0 |     0 |
| [lib]/misc       |   232 |     8 |    28 |
| main.o           |    56 |     0 |     4 |
| mbed-os/features |    42 |     0 |   184 |
| mbed-os/hal      |   450 |     0 |     8 |
| mbed-os/platform |  1252 |     4 |   269 |
| mbed-os/rtos     |  5955 |    24 |  6874 |
| mbed-os/targets  |  9788 |    12 |   384 |
| Subtotals        | 44119 |  2256 | 10320 |
+------------------+-------+-------+-------+

geky · 2018-02-21T19:47:25Z

It's because I'm compiling inside the mbed-os directory. This matches the output from before #5929.

Now prints both the table and bars if available

marcuschangarm · 2018-02-21T19:57:12Z

Memap!!

cmonr · 2018-02-21T20:49:53Z

Is there a particular reason that the memmap table and the bars are printed by default? Is there any way to make the outputs not be printed?

0xc0170 · 2018-02-22T07:27:19Z

/morph build

mbed-ci · 2018-02-22T08:04:23Z

Build : SUCCESS

Build number : 1211
Build artifacts/logs : http://mbed-os.s3-website-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/?prefix=builds/6155/

Triggering tests

/morph test
/morph uvisor-test
/morph export-build
/morph mbed2-build

jeromecoutant · 2018-02-22T08:14:46Z

Hi
Note that #5929 is not perfect for targets with 2 RAM...

0xc0170 · 2018-02-22T08:20:36Z

Note that #5929 is not perfect for targets with 2 RAM...

Can you provide an issue report (how to reproduce it , what it outputs (correct/wrong) ?

mbed-ci · 2018-02-22T09:50:53Z

Exporter Build : SUCCESS

Build number : 882
Build artifacts/logs : http://mbed-os.s3-website-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/?prefix=builds/exporter/6155/

mbed-ci · 2018-02-22T11:34:59Z

Test : FAILURE

Build number : 1012
Test logs :http://mbed-os-logs.s3-website-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/?prefix=logs/6155/1012

adbridge · 2018-02-22T12:17:37Z

/morph test

mbed-ci · 2018-02-22T18:31:33Z

Test : SUCCESS

Build number : 1017
Test logs :http://mbed-os-logs.s3-website-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/?prefix=logs/6155/1017

MarceloSalazar · 2018-02-22T20:33:15Z

Can we understand and clarify the difference between these two statements for RAM and Flash, so developers don't get confused ?
91036 vs 88.9KB?
10116 vs 9.88KB?
I don't like the idea of showing different information.

memap

Total Static RAM memory (data + bss): 10116 bytes
Total Flash memory (text + data): 91036 bytes

Bars

ROM [||||||||                                            ]  88.9KB/512KB
RAM [|||||||||||||||                                     ]   9.88KB/32KB

Also for bars, I assume it shows static RAM, right?

theotherjimmy · 2018-02-22T20:39:20Z

@MarceloSalazar What difference are you talking about?
9.88 KB * 1024B/KB ~= 10116 bytes
88.9KB * 1024B/KB ~= 91036 bytes

geky · 2018-02-22T20:42:07Z

Ah it was the power-of-2 units. I was also confused.

Should we also print the tables totals using human readable units? That would probably avoid confusion.

MarceloSalazar · 2018-02-22T20:42:27Z

OK, let's make it more explicit ;-)
In summary, I'd suggest we stick to one way of showing info.

geky · 2018-02-22T20:43:13Z

explicit? what do you mean?

theotherjimmy · 2018-02-22T20:43:21Z

https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/13815/files-size-units-kib-vs-kb-vs-kb

It seems that it is explicit already

geky · 2018-02-22T20:47:23Z

Ah, do you mean we should use KiB? That's easy enough to change, although at this point it looks like we'll miss the next patch release (code freeze for 5.7.6 eod today).

marcuschangarm · 2018-02-22T21:51:20Z

It in our style guide! https://docs.mbed.com/docs/writing-and-publishing-guides/en/latest/units/

theotherjimmy · 2018-02-23T15:26:34Z

Well, it's official: an XKCD comic set a standard for units!

marcuschangarm · 2018-02-23T16:18:12Z

Does that mean we are switching to Baker's Kilobyte? 😆

theotherjimmy · 2018-02-23T16:19:22Z

Only if the suffix is KBa. For those that don't like clicking links, or reading XKCD, a KBa is 1152 Bytes.

screamerbg · 2018-02-23T18:01:18Z

@cmonr @geky @0xc0170 Can we get this in? I'd like the normal behavior restored ASAP.

screamerbg · 2018-02-23T18:01:36Z

Or the bar patch reverted

cmonr · 2018-02-23T18:03:18Z

@screamerbg Sure, but we need 1) @MarceloSalazar's comment about the sizing to be resolved, and 2) at least one person to approve this PR. Sound like you're willing to give this PR the ok as-is?

screamerbg · 2018-02-23T18:06:17Z

@cmonr Would you like me to send a PR that reverts the bars PR entirely, or would you like to fix the output so it doesn't report in KB/MB/GB, but rather in bytes? E.g. https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbed-os/pull/5929/files#diff-f9cb941bde5647a5763e18fc220efc51R657

cmonr · 2018-02-23T18:08:18Z

@screamerbg I can amend this PR to get the output size inline with what we had before.

screamerbg · 2018-02-23T18:08:54Z

@cmonr Great, thanks. What will be the release tag for this?

geky · 2018-02-23T18:52:16Z

Was about to change KB->KiB but saw there's been a bunch of discussion. What's the plan for this pr? Do you need me to not touch it?

screamerbg · 2018-02-23T19:09:49Z

@geky please discuss with @cmonr

geky · 2018-02-23T19:35:59Z

Simple revert: #6197

geky · 2018-02-23T19:59:43Z

Tabling this for now (pun not intended)

cmonr · 2018-02-23T20:07:52Z

Work has been moved to #6197.

tools: Bring back memap output by default

54dca6b

Now prints both the table and bars if available

geky force-pushed the g-bring-back-memap branch from 93b1a5b to 54dca6b Compare February 21, 2018 19:50

cmonr requested review from theotherjimmy, MarceloSalazar and screamerbg February 21, 2018 20:37

cmonr added release-version: 5.7.6 needs: review labels Feb 21, 2018

cmonr added ready for merge needs: review and removed needs: review labels Feb 22, 2018

MarceloSalazar removed the ready for merge label Feb 22, 2018

cmonr removed the release-version: 5.7.6 label Feb 23, 2018

geky mentioned this pull request Feb 23, 2018

Revert "Added pretty bar printing for compile output" #6197

Merged

geky closed this Feb 23, 2018

geky removed the needs: review label Feb 23, 2018

geky deleted the g-bring-back-memap branch April 20, 2018 16:26

tools: Bring back memap output by default #6155

tools: Bring back memap output by default #6155

Uh oh!

Conversation

geky commented Feb 21, 2018 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

MarceloSalazar commented Feb 21, 2018 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

geky commented Feb 21, 2018 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

marcuschangarm commented Feb 21, 2018

Uh oh!

cmonr commented Feb 21, 2018

Uh oh!

0xc0170 commented Feb 22, 2018

Uh oh!

mbed-ci commented Feb 22, 2018

Build : SUCCESS

Triggering tests

Uh oh!

jeromecoutant commented Feb 22, 2018

Uh oh!

0xc0170 commented Feb 22, 2018

Uh oh!

mbed-ci commented Feb 22, 2018

Exporter Build : SUCCESS

Uh oh!

mbed-ci commented Feb 22, 2018

Test : FAILURE

Uh oh!

adbridge commented Feb 22, 2018

Uh oh!

mbed-ci commented Feb 22, 2018

Test : SUCCESS

Uh oh!

MarceloSalazar commented Feb 22, 2018 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

theotherjimmy commented Feb 22, 2018

Uh oh!

geky commented Feb 22, 2018 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

MarceloSalazar commented Feb 22, 2018 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

geky commented Feb 22, 2018

Uh oh!

theotherjimmy commented Feb 22, 2018

Uh oh!

geky commented Feb 22, 2018

Uh oh!

marcuschangarm commented Feb 22, 2018

Uh oh!

theotherjimmy commented Feb 23, 2018

Uh oh!

marcuschangarm commented Feb 23, 2018

Uh oh!

theotherjimmy commented Feb 23, 2018 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

screamerbg commented Feb 23, 2018

Uh oh!

screamerbg commented Feb 23, 2018

Uh oh!

cmonr commented Feb 23, 2018

Uh oh!

screamerbg commented Feb 23, 2018

Uh oh!

cmonr commented Feb 23, 2018

Uh oh!

screamerbg commented Feb 23, 2018

Uh oh!

geky commented Feb 23, 2018

Uh oh!

screamerbg commented Feb 23, 2018

Uh oh!

geky commented Feb 21, 2018 •

edited

Loading

MarceloSalazar commented Feb 21, 2018 •

edited

Loading

geky commented Feb 21, 2018 •

edited

Loading

MarceloSalazar commented Feb 22, 2018 •

edited

Loading

geky commented Feb 22, 2018 •

edited

Loading

MarceloSalazar commented Feb 22, 2018 •

edited

Loading

theotherjimmy commented Feb 23, 2018 •

edited

Loading