Re: [meta-arago][scarthgap][PATCH v5] coremark: add Coremark CPU benchmark

Denys Dmytriyenko <[email protected]>
Newsgroups org.yoctoproject.lists.meta-arago
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Wed, Nov 19, 2025 at 11:27:01AM -0600, Ryan Eatmon via lists.yoctoproject.org wrote:
> 
> 
> On 11/19/2025 6:41 AM, sadik wrote:
> >Add CoreMark benchmark recipe to measure CPU
> >performance on TI platforms,Integrate CoreMark
> >into ti-test package group alongside arm-benchmarks.
> >
> >CoreMark is an industry-standard CPU benchmark from
> >EEMBC(Embedded Microprocessor Benchmark Consortium)
> >that provides a standardized method to test the
> >performance of processors.
> >
> >Signed-off-by: sadik <[email protected]>
> >---
> >
> >Changes in v5:
> >- change subject line to include recipe name
> >- append _git to recipe name for tracking of version
> >
> >Link to v4:https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-arago/message/16784
> >
> >Changes in v4:
> >- change logs moved after the "---" line
> >- change the summary of the coremark in recipe
> >
> >Link to v3:https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-arago/message/16776
> >
> >Changes in v3:
> >- sent patch via UTF-8 encoding
> >
> >Changes in v2:
> >- Include Coremark licese file in licenses
> >- Use oe_runmake with proper compiler flags for cross-compilation
> >- Removed unnecessary TARGET_CC_ARCH, COMPATIBLE_HOST, and SRC_URI checksum
> >- Move coremark in alphabetical order in TI_TEST_TI_TOOLS
> >
> >Link to v1:https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/meta-arago/message/16707
> >
> >---
> >  meta-arago-test/licenses/Coremark             | 91 +++++++++++++++++++
> >  .../coremark/coremark_git.bb                  | 18 ++++
> >  .../recipes-core/packagegroups/ti-test.bb     |  1 +
> >  3 files changed, 110 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 meta-arago-test/licenses/Coremark
> >  create mode 100644 meta-arago-test/recipes-benchmark/coremark/coremark_git.bb
> >
> >diff --git a/meta-arago-test/recipes-benchmark/coremark/coremark_git.bb b/meta-arago-test/recipes-benchmark/coremark/coremark_git.bb
> >new file mode 100644
> >index 00000000..7655a445
> >--- /dev/null
> >+++ b/meta-arago-test/recipes-benchmark/coremark/coremark_git.bb
> >@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
> >+SUMMARY = "Industry-standard benchmark that measures CPU performance"
> >+
> >+LICENSE = "Coremark"
> >+LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://LICENSE.md;md5=0a18b17ae63deaa8a595035f668aebe1"
> >+
> >+SRC_URI = "git://github.com/eembc/coremark.git;branch=main;protocol=https"
> >+SRCREV = "1f483d5b8316753a742cbf5590caf5bd0a4e4777"
> >+
> >+S = "${WORKDIR}/git"
> 
> This patch looks better, and I'll start testing it today.  But I
> also need a master version of this patch since this recipe will not
> work in master as is.
> 
> The only change that I think is needed is to remove the line:
> 
> S = "${WORKDIR}/git"

It still doesn't set the version, as _git suffix in the filename isn't for 
that.

I see when CoreMark sources were imported into GitHub, they were tagged as 
1.01 corresponding to a 2009 release, and no new releases or tags were made 
since then:

https://github.com/eembc/coremark/releases/tag/v1.01

This means we should probably add

PV = "1.01+git"

to base off of the release and track individual commits since then.


> >+do_compile() {
> >+    oe_runmake PORT_DIR=linux CC="${CC}" XCFLAGS="${CFLAGS}" LFLAGS_END="${LDFLAGS}" compile
> >+}
> >+
> >+do_install() {
> >+    install -d ${D}${bindir}
> >+    install -m 0755 ${S}/coremark.exe ${D}${bindir}/coremark
> >+}
> >diff --git a/meta-arago-test/recipes-core/packagegroups/ti-test.bb b/meta-arago-test/recipes-core/packagegroups/ti-test.bb
> >index c1166bc2..e05add8b 100644
> >--- a/meta-arago-test/recipes-core/packagegroups/ti-test.bb
> >+++ b/meta-arago-test/recipes-core/packagegroups/ti-test.bb
> >@@ -89,6 +89,7 @@ TI_TEST_BASE:append:armv7ve = " \
> >  TI_TEST_TI_TOOLS = " \
> >      arm-benchmarks \
> >      arm-ddr-bandwidth \
> >+    coremark \
> >      cpuloadgen \
> >      input-utils \
> >      ltp-ddt \
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.