Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Addition of query for xrt_smi_configuration.json #8671

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 2, 2025

Conversation

aktondak
Copy link
Collaborator

Problem solved by the commit

This change adds a new query object to shim layer for drivers to provide the path for xrt_smi_configuration.json.
This structure can/should be augmented for future jsons we plan to add.

Bug / issue (if any) fixed, which PR introduced the bug, how it was discovered

https://jira.xilinx.com/browse/VITIS-14245

How problem was solved, alternative solutions (if any) and why they were rejected

The problem was solved by adding a new structure to query objects

Risks (if any) associated the changes in the commit

N/A

What has been tested and how, request additional testing if necessary

Tested on Linux xdna

Documentation impact (if any)

N/A

Signed-off-by: Akshay Tondak <aktondak@amd.com>
@aktondak aktondak requested a review from AShivangi December 20, 2024 17:59
@gbuildx
Copy link
Collaborator

gbuildx commented Dec 20, 2024

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

Copy link
Collaborator

@stsoe stsoe left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good to me. Not really sure what the enum class type enumerators signify?

@aktondak
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Looks good to me. Not really sure what the enum class type enumerators signify?

The idea is to keep this query struct extendible to other xrt-smi specific JSONs that might come in future. Though there's just one today. We discussed on possibly making validate tests json based as well.

@maxzhen maxzhen merged commit acc1449 into Xilinx:master Jan 2, 2025
20 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants