Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
539 lines (398 loc) · 21.6 KB

DEVELOPMENT.md

File metadata and controls

539 lines (398 loc) · 21.6 KB

Development process of the Accellera SystemC implementation

This document focuses on the technical aspects related to the development of the SystemC implementation. Legal and formal procedures are documented at http://accellera.org/about/policies-and-procedures.

Repository setup

The central source code repository of the Accellera SystemC implementation is hosted in two Git repositories at GitHub. The main repositories are private to the OSCI-WG organization and can be found at:

A read-only, public copy of these repositories can be found at

Members of the GitHub OSCI-WG organization with the necessary access rights can clone the repositories via SSH from the locations

 git clone -o osci-wg [email protected]:OSCI-WG/systemc.git
 git clone -o osci-wg [email protected]:OSCI-WG/systemc-regressions.git

respectively.

To obtain access to the repositories and the GitHub organization in general, LWG members can contact the LWG chairs at mailto:[email protected] including their GitHub account name.

Note: Using an explicit name of the 'remote' (-o osci-wg) is recommended to allow using the default remote name origin for a personal fork where you can push your changes by default, see below.

Comprehensive documentation about Git, a distributed version control system, can be found in the Pro Git book, also available online. Since Git is 'distributed', it is a very natural choice for the distributed development process needed for collaboratively evolving the reference implementation of SystemC.

Relationship between private and public repositories

New features and enhancements are developed by the LWG in the private repositories, see below. Please check the CONTRIBUTING guidelines how to join Accellera and its working groups to contribute to the development of SystemC.

The public repositories are typically updated only together with public releases of the Accellera SystemC reference implementation.

In-between public releases, bug fixes may be published via the public repositories as well. In this case, the updated public branch including the new bug fixes, is then merged back into the master branch to make sure the fix is part of the next release.

Creating a personal fork

In order to contribute changes to the different repositories, it is recommended to create personal (or company-based) forks of the repositories on GitHub and push the proposed changes (bugfixes, features, ...) there. These forks are also only accessible to members of the OSCI-WG GitHub organization. Details of the intended work-flow are described in the next section. It is convenient to add this GitHub fork as a remote to your local clone of the repository:

  cd <repo>/
  git remote add origin [email protected]:<your-account>/<repo>.git
  git branch --set-upstream master origin/master

Any changes can then be pushed to GitHub using:

  git push [options] [<repository>] [<refspec>...]
  • If you omit the <repository>, the default destination is the remote of the current branch (or origin).
  • The <refspec> basically follows the format <local-branch>:<remote-branch>, or just <branch>, if both are the same.
  • Omitting the <refspec> pushes all branches with 'matching' remote branches to the repository.

A basic cheat sheet containing the an overview of the general Git commands and workflow can be found online.

Development flow

Basic branch setup

The main idea is to have two main branches, one for the development, one for the releases.

  • master

    The latest and greatest HEAD of the LWG development. This is where all the new features and fixes go.

  • public

    The latest revision pushed to the public repository of SystemC. This may also include changes, that are not yet part of an official release package.

  • release

    This branch is used to create the release tarballs, both internal and public snapshots, typically based on the public branch.

For the regressions, the release branch is more or less just a pointer to the latest revision of a snapshot (or release). It is still useful to keep a named branching point, in case of required hotfixes.

For the core library, the release branch is to be different from the master branch. The idea is to fully track the contents of the released tarball. This requires the following changes compared to the master branch:

  • The Automake generated files are added to this tree.
  • Accellera internal files are stripped (.gitignore, internal documentation, ...).

To prepare a release, the master branch would then be merged into the release branch, the automake files would be updated (if necessary) and the clean working tree could be used as baseline for the tarball (e.g., via git-archive(1)). Details are described in the next section release management. The history of the (core library) repostitory could then look like shown in the following graph (time progresses upwards):

   time  feature   master hotfix release
         branches    |         | |
    ^      |  |
    |                [master]
    |                |           [release]
    ^          ----- o           |
    |         /      |           o - [systemc-2.3.0.1]
    |        /    -- o          /|
    |       /    /   |         o |
    ^      |  o--   ...         \|
    |      o ...     |  -------- o - [systemc-2.3.0]
    |      |  o     .../         |
    |      o   \---- o -[public] ..
    ^       \       \|           |
    |        ------- o           o   (internal snapshot)
    |               ...          |
    ^                            o - [systemc-2.2.0]

It should usually be sufficient to keep the two branches master and release, and cherry-pick hotfixes for emergency releases directly on top of the release branch. For convenience, an additional public branch could be used to mark the branching point for the last release.

If more sophisticated version branches are needed, a development model similar to the well-known "successful branching model" can be deployed. Not all aspects of this model are expected to be needed for the SystemC implementation, as we usually maintain only a single (i.e., the latest) public release of the kernel.

Adding a feature (set)

The development of a new contribution in form of a feature or a complex bug fix is best done in a new feature branch, which is forked and checked out from the Accellera master branch:

  git checkout -b <company>-<feature-xyz> master

Then code up the new contribution. Please try to facilitate code review by other Accellera members by logically grouping your changes into one commit per addressed issue. For the commit messages, please consider to follow these suggestions:

Note: Commit messages

Though not required, it's a good idea to begin the commit message with a single short (less than 50 character) line summarizing the change, followed by a blank line and then a more thorough description. Tools that turn commits into email, for example, use the first line on the Subject: line and the rest of the commit in the body.

Note: Sign-off procedure for commits

In order to document that contributions are submitted under the Apache-2.0 license (see LICENSE), a sign-off procedure is defined in the contributing guidelines.

During the development of the contribution, the master branch may receive other commits. In that case, consider rebasing the commits in your feature branch onto the HEAD of the master branch to keep the history clean. Once the contribution is ready for review by the working group, push the feature branch in your fork of the respective repository on GitHub:

  git push <your-github-fork-remote-name> <company>-<feature-xyz>

Then, send a pull request either manually or via GitHub to initiate the code review by the working group members. The summary can be manually generated by

  git request-pull master [email protected]/<account>/<repo>.git \
          <company-feature-xyz>

to be sent to the LWG reflector.

To review the proposed contributions, one can either browse the repository at GitHub, or add the remote location to a local clone of the repository

  # add the fork to your set of "remotes"
  git remote add <remote-name> [email protected]/<account>/<repo>.git
  git fetch  <remote-name>

  # examine differences
  git diff master..<remote-name>/<company-feature-xyz>
  git log <remote-name>/<company-feature-xyz>

After the contribution is accepted, it will be merged into the working group's master branch by the responsible source code maintainer. This should be done with an explicit merge commit, to keep the individual contributions separated:

  git merge --no-ff --log \
     <remote-name>/<company-feature-xyz>

Instead of fully merging the contribution, the maintainer may choose to cherry-pick individual commits or to rebase the feature branch on an intermittently updated master. He may also request additional changes to be done by the submitter. In that case, the submitter may need to merge recent changes to the master branch into his feature branch before carrying out the requested changes.

After the contribution has been fully merged into master, the feature branch in the local and Github fork may be deleted.

  git branch -d <company-feature-xyz>      # delete local branch
  git push  origin :<company-feature-xyz>  # delete remote branch

Maintaining a private (set of) branches

Vendors may be interested in maintaining their own, in-house flow to align the internal development of a derived SystemC implementation, while being able to pick fixes from the Accellera Working Group's tree (and hopefully) contributing fixes and features back to the reference implementation.

For this purpose members may employ the already mentioned "successful branching model" by Vincent Driessen. The vendor can branch its own development branch, e.g., develop-<vendor> from the already tracked working group development branch master in his clone of the WG repository. The vendor is then able to integrate commits on the WG development branch by merging it into his his vendor development branch.

Bug fixes to be contributed back to the WG consist usually of one or several isolated commits. They need to be cherry-picked from the vendor's development branch into a new branch created from the WG development branch:

  git checkout -b <vendor>-fix-<bug> origin/master
  git cherry-pick <commit>...

Once, the bug fix branch is ready, it should be pushed into the vendor's github account and a pull request created, as described in the feature branch section.

A new feature consists usually of a series of commits developed in a dedicated feature branched of the vendor's or WG's development branch. Only in the first case, a rebase on the top of the WG's development branch is necessary. To this end, branch first from the feature branch:

  git checkout -b <vendor>-<new-feature> <private-feature-branch>
  git rebase [-i|--interactive] --onto origin/master develop-<vendor>

Once, the bug fix branch is ready, it should be pushed into the vendor's github account and a pull request created, as described in the feature branch section.

Versioning scheme

In general, the versioning pattern for the SystemC/TLM reference implementation follows the scheme defined in IEEE Std. 1666-2011 (8.6.5), based on Major.Minor.Patch numbers and a date (for prereleases).

Note: In general, no compatibility guarantees are attached to these version numbers, not even for PoC implementation itself, to avoid burdens across different SystemC implementations.

The individual parts of the SystemC/TLM versions reported via the corresponding header files should be be handled according to the following criteria:

  • Update major version only together with
    • IEEE 1666 update
    • and/or major new language features (e.g. in pre-releases for IEEE update)
  • Update minor version for new Accellera standard release
    • Significant language extension proposals to be added to next IEEE release
  • Update patch version for minor API changes
  • Update SYSTEMC_VERSION date macro after every pull-request merge
    • ISO8601 date format (YYYYMMDD)
    • Done by the PoC maintainers
  • The versions of SystemC and TLM are incremented separately
    • SystemC (src/sysc/kernel/sc_ver.h)
    • TLM (src/tlm_core/tlm_2/tlm_version.h)

Note: Changes only affecting documentation, examples, or the build system should not lead to a change of the version (not even SYSTEMC_VERSION macro).

The overall release date (see next section) of the PoC release tarball should reflect the date of the archive creation.

Release management

To prepare a new release tarball, the following set steps are to be performed by the maintainer

  1. Prepare the release in the master branch

    Before creating a release snapshot, the documentation and version information in the package should be updated within the master branch. This includes files like

    During the release preparation phase, other functional changes should not be added/merged to the master branch.

  2. Update the release branch

     # switch to release branch
 git checkout release

 # merge master branch
 git merge --no-commit master
 git rm <new-internal-file...> # drop new or changed "private" files
 git commit -m "merge master branch for x.x.x release"

  3. Update the Autoconf (and other auto-generated) files

     autoreconf -if # or config/bootstrap
 git add -u     # add changed files
 git status     # check for untracked files
 git add <new files to distribute>
 git commit -m "update autogenerated files for x.x.x release"

  4. Tag the release revision

    In order to keep track of the release snapshots, the revisions used for creating the release tarballs should be marked with an annotated and optionally signed Git tag.

     # git tag -a -m "<package> <version>" <version> <refspec>
 git tag -a -m "SystemC 2.3.0" 2.3.0 release

    The tagname should contain the <version>, following the versioning rules in IEEE 1666-2011. There are three standard formats:

    • x.x.x_beta_<isodate> for beta/internal versions
    • x.x.x_pub_rev_<isodate> for public review versions, and
    • x.x.x for public release versions.

    NOTE: The tag should be on the release branch, to enable the automated tarball creation in the next step.

  5. Create the release tarball

    git archive can then be used to create the release tarball. git describe can be used to obtain the correct tarball name based on the current tag.

     PACKAGE="`basename $(git rev-parse --show-toplevel)`" # or directly 'systemc'
 VERSION="`git describe release`"
 git archive -o ${PACKAGE}-${VERSION}.tgz \
             --prefix=${PACKAGE}-${VERSION}/ release

    NOTE: Even without a tag, a quick-shot release of the release branch can be generated this way.

  6. Publish the release

    Upload the archive to the LWG area for internal review and push the changes to GitHub.

     git push osci-wg master release <version>

    NOTE: The tag needs to be pushed explicitly.

    NOTE: For each tag pushed to the GitHub repository, the corresponding release archive can be downloaded from GitHub directly via https://github.com/osci-wg/systemc/releases/tag/<version>.

    For public releases, update the public branch and repeat the same steps for the public repositories:

     git push osci-wg master:public
 git push accellera-official master release <version>

Issue tracking

Open issues (bugs, cleanups, features) related to the reference implementation of SystemC/TLM are tracked via GitHub:

Some issues might be reported against the public repositories as well:

NOTE: For issues discussed in the LWG, the internal issue tracker is preferred. An internal issue clone will be added for publicly reported issues.

NOTE: To distinguish between the two different trackers, issue references in commit messages or pull-requests should include the repository (osci-wg/systemc#<no>, accellera-official/systemc#<no>).

Issues are grouped (by using labels) in the following categories for different parts of the implementation:

  • core - SystemC core language, i.e. everything in sc_core
  • datatypes - SystemC datatypes, i.e. in sc_dt
  • tlm - TLM-1.0, TLM-2.0
  • infrastructure - build system(s), scripts, etc.

Additional labels are used to classify issues according to their severity (10 highest), according to the following guidelines:

  • 10-critical
    Show-stoppers that must be fixed, affects all (or at least most) platforms and violates fundamental specifications for most applications.

  • 09-serious
    At least one of the explicitly supported platforms is affected and causes significant problems for many applications.

  • 06-medium
    Covers an area, where the standard may not be clearly specified. May require changes to external/standard API.

  • 05-feature
    New feature proposal, beyond the current standard. Includes internal (and external, providing adoption by IEEE P1666 WG) API changes.

  • 04-errata
    Inconvenience (errata) for users of many platforms, workaround available. Solution may require internal API changes.

  • 02-documentation
    Documentation inconsistency or insufficiency (e.g. whitepaper unclear or misleading), no code changes.

  • 01-inconvenience
    Inconvenience (workaround available), for some platforms (e.g. users of Visual Studio 2003)

  • 00-cosmetic
    Changes addressing performance or clarity of implementation, no API changes.

The discussion on issues usually starts on the LWG reflector or during the LWG meetings. After an initial consensus on the "validity" of the issue, the issue is added to the issue tracking system, a classification is done (including a target milestone), and preferably a responsible person is assigned.

Changelog

  • v2.2 (2019-11-10)

    • Fix link to policies and procedures
    • Add reference to sign-off process described in CONTRIBUTING.md

  • v2.1 (2019-04-23)

    • Update information about public repositories and their relation to the WG-internal repositories.

  • v2.0 (2018-10-01)

    • Reorganize contents between CONTRIBUTING.md and DEVELOPMENT.md
    • Add information about public repositories
    • Formatting fixes and cleanups

  • v1.1 (2015-08-23)

    • Add versioning scheme section
    • Dropped obsolete pristine-tar section
    • Changed "ASI" to Accellera throughout the document
    • Updated contact information

  • v1.0 - Development flow implemented at GitHub (2013-06-20)

    • Issue tracking documented

  • v0.9 - Initial proposal to the Accellera SystemC LWG (2012-09-25)

    • To be discussed during the October LWG phone conference

Authors