Add TI Arm Clang Compiler Support to CMSIS Core Validation

[smmasongt]

Update build scripts to utilize TI Arm Clang Compiler in Core Validation:

• Adds Clang_TI option to build script.
• Adds new filter for TI supported devices.
• Adds new filter for Core Validation supported devices to replace commented code.
• Updates Target.clayer.yml files for TI supported devices to specify regions files for TI Arm Clang Compiler.
• Removes older TI linker command files.

Note 1: I was unable able to verify the "run" portion of the build script due to license issues with the Fast Models. This needs to be tested to ensure compiler and linker scripts perform as expected.

Note 2: This update relies on the common linker script in the CMSIS Toolbox devtools. This file needs to be patched for the build to work. For testing the 'clang_ti_linker_script.cmd.src` script can be temporarily updated with the following commands:

--stack_size=__STACK_SIZE
--heap_size=__HEAP_SIZE
--symbol_map=_start=_c_int00

#if defined (__ARM_FEATURE_CMSE) && (__ARM_FEATURE_CMSE == 3U)
#define __STACKSEAL_SIZE 8
#else
#define __STACKSEAL_SIZE 0
#endif

#if defined (__ROM0_BASE)
__stack = __ROM0_BASE + __ROM0_SIZE - __STACKSEAL_SIZE - 1;
__stack_seal = __ROM0_BASE + __ROM0_SIZE - __STACKSEAL_SIZE - 1;
__stack_limit = __ROM0_BASE + __ROM0_SIZE - __STACKSEAL_SIZE - __STACK_SIZE;
#define __STACK_ADDR (__ROM0_BASE + __ROM0_SIZE - __STACKSEAL_SIZE - 1)
#define __STACK_LIMIT_ADDR (__ROM0_BASE + __ROM0_SIZE - __STACKSEAL_SIZE - __STACK_SIZE)
#else
__stack = __ROM_BASE + __ROM_SIZE - __STACKSEAL_SIZE - 1;
__stack_seal = __ROM_BASE + __ROM_SIZE - __STACKSEAL_SIZE - 1;
__stack_limit = __ROM_BASE + __ROM_SIZE - __STACKSEAL_SIZE - __STACK_SIZE;
#define __STACK_ADDR (__ROM_BASE + __ROM_SIZE - __STACKSEAL_SIZE - 1)
#define __STACK_LIMIT_ADDR (__ROM_BASE + __ROM_SIZE - __STACKSEAL_SIZE - __STACK_SIZE)
#endif

MEMORY
{
#if defined (__ROM0_BASE)
ROM0 : ORIGIN = __ROM0_BASE, LENGTH = __ROM0_SIZE
#else
ROM0 : ORIGIN = __ROM_BASE, LENGTH = __ROM_SIZE
#endif

#if defined (__ROM1_BASE)
ROM1 : ORIGIN = __ROM1_BASE, LENGTH = __ROM1_SIZE
#endif

#if defined (__RAM0_BASE)
RAM0 : ORIGIN = __RAM0_BASE, LENGTH = __RAM0_SIZE
#else
RAM0 : ORIGIN = __RAM_BASE, LENGTH = __RAM_SIZE
#endif

#if defined (__RAM1_BASE)
RAM1 : ORIGIN = __RAM1_BASE, LENGTH = __RAM1_SIZE
#endif
}

SECTIONS
{
.vectors: 0x00000000
.cinit: palign=4 {} > ROM0
.pinit: palign=4 {} > ROM0

.text: palign=4 {} > ROM0
.const: palign=4 {} > ROM0
.rodata: palign=4 {} > ROM0

.data: palign=4 {} > RAM0
.bss: type=NOINIT, palign=4 {} > RAM0

.stack: run=__STACK_LIMIT_ADDR, type=NOLOAD {} > RAM0

#if __STACKSEAL_SIZE > 0
.stackseal: run=__STACK_ADDR, type=NOLOAD {} > RAM0
#endif
}

[github-actions]

Test Results

   264 files   -    300     264 suites   - 300   0s ⏱️ - 12m 24s
    56 tests +     7      54 ✅ +   10      2 💤  -     3  0 ❌ ±0 
14 292 runs   - 13 344  12 124 ✅  - 4 580  2 168 💤  - 8 764  0 ❌ ±0 

Results for commit 1fa9350. ± Comparison against base commit fdbbc52.

This pull request removes 49 and adds 56 tests. Note that renamed tests count towards both.

CMSIS-Core.src ‑ apsr.c
CMSIS-Core.src ‑ basepri.c
CMSIS-Core.src ‑ bkpt.c
CMSIS-Core.src ‑ clrex.c
CMSIS-Core.src ‑ clz.c
CMSIS-Core.src ‑ control.c
CMSIS-Core.src ‑ cp15.c
CMSIS-Core.src ‑ cpsr.c
CMSIS-Core.src ‑ dmb.c
CMSIS-Core.src ‑ dsb.c
…

TC_CML1Cache_CleanDCacheByAddrWhileDisabled
TC_CML1Cache_EnDisableDCache
TC_CML1Cache_EnDisableICache
TC_CoreFunc_APSR
TC_CoreFunc_BASEPRI
TC_CoreFunc_Control
TC_CoreFunc_EnDisIRQ
TC_CoreFunc_EncDecIRQPrio
TC_CoreFunc_FAULTMASK
TC_CoreFunc_FPSCR
…

This pull request removes 5 skipped tests and adds 2 skipped tests. Note that renamed tests count towards both.

CMSIS-Core.src ‑ lda.c
CMSIS-Core.src ‑ ldaex.c
CMSIS-Core.src ‑ stl.c
CMSIS-Core.src ‑ stlex.c
CMSIS-Core.src ‑ systick.c

TC_CoreInstr_WFE
TC_CoreInstr_WFI

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

[JonatanAntoni]

If we want TI Clang CoreValidation tests to be executed in GitHub CI, please consider updating corevalidation.yml workflow.

[smmasongt]

Updated corevalidation.yml to add Clang_TI to the compiler matrix.

[smmasongt]

Hello @JonatanAntoni , I spent some time looking at how we could get the TI compiler in the workflow without a package manager. One option is to include a step which consists of a generic downloader for pulling the TI compiler installer from their public website and then installing it. It would be quite resource intensive though (285 MB download / 1GB+ installed). I looked at the GCC vcpkg and it was a similar size, so maybe this is not an issue. Do you have any thoughts on the approach, or possibly a better way to solve the problem?

[JonatanAntoni]

Hello @JonatanAntoni , I spent some time looking at how we could get the TI compiler in the workflow without a package manager. One option is to include a step which consists of a generic downloader for pulling the TI compiler installer from their public website and then installing it. It would be quite resource intensive though (285 MB download / 1GB+ installed). I looked at the GCC vcpkg and it was a similar size, so maybe this is not an issue. Do you have any thoughts on the approach, or possibly a better way to solve the problem?

No better solution. I think we might cache the install folder with an additional cache step so that the download is skipped. We need to watch the cache size. I.e., the required steps may be:

• Restore from cache (version, os)
• Download from remote and extract (if cache missed)
• Enrich the env ($GITHUB_ENV) with CLANG_TI_TOOLCHAIN_5_0_0 variable

[smmasongt]

@JonatanAntoni I've updated both the Core and CoreValidation workflow routines to bring the TI compiler into the workflow. Could you please review and let me know if this is an acceptable solution? There is an issue with running the Fast Models with the Clang_TI .elf but it will be difficult to troubleshoot without a local license. Maybe you can take a look at that as well. I imagine it's a problem with the linker scripts.

[KeilChris]

@smmasongt, I can get you a license to test this.

[smmasongt]

@smmasongt, I can get you a license to test this.

@KeilChris That would be great. I'll be on travel this week and won't have access to my development environment, but we can coordinate on the license so I can test when I get back.

[JonatanAntoni]

@smmasongt, you could check if the MDK Community Edition is already sufficient for your analysis:

> armlm --server https://mdk-preview.keil.arm.com --product KEMDK-COM0 

armlm is part of Arm Compiler for example, which gets installed via vcpkg.

[smmasongt]

@smmasongt, you could check if the MDK Community Edition is already sufficient for your analysis:

> armlm --server https://mdk-preview.keil.arm.com --product KEMDK-COM0 

armlm is part of Arm Compiler for example, which gets installed via vcpkg.

Thank you. I will try this out.