|
Re: STM32F103x port
Hi Maciek,
Would be great to generalize as much as possible now. At least for
what's concerning stm32.
For instance, maybe gpio/pinmuxer could be generalized as well that way.
Tomasz
Hi Maciek,
Would be great to generalize as much as possible now. At least for
what's concerning stm32.
For instance, maybe gpio/pinmuxer could be generalized as well that way.
Tomasz
|
By
Tomasz Bursztyka
·
#2482
·
|
|
Re: RFC: Use error codes from errno.h
Hi,
Quoting Nashif, Anas (2016-03-04 09:34:45)
Nice, let's move on with this convention. I'll send patches to gerrit soon.
Thanks all,
Andre
Hi,
Quoting Nashif, Anas (2016-03-04 09:34:45)
Nice, let's move on with this convention. I'll send patches to gerrit soon.
Thanks all,
Andre
|
By
Andre Guedes <andre.guedes@...>
·
#2481
·
|
|
Re: RFC: Use error codes from errno.h
Yes please,
Thanks.
Anas
By
Nashif, Anas
·
#2480
·
|
|
Re: STM32F103x port
That's great. I'll definitely take a look at it.
Can you check if drivers in the patchset that I posted are useful for
you? Specifically,
the UART driver might be reusable across a larger number of
That's great. I'll definitely take a look at it.
Can you check if drivers in the patchset that I posted are useful for
you? Specifically,
the UART driver might be reusable across a larger number of
|
By
Maciek Borzecki <maciek.borzecki@...>
·
#2479
·
|
|
Re: STM32F103x port
Hej Maciek,
I added stm32f4 support to your stm32 patch:
https://gerrit.zephyrproject.org/r/#/c/671/
Code is tested to run on Nucleo board included it the patch.
Cheers,
Pawel
Hej Maciek,
I added stm32f4 support to your stm32 patch:
https://gerrit.zephyrproject.org/r/#/c/671/
Code is tested to run on Nucleo board included it the patch.
Cheers,
Pawel
|
By
Pawel Wodnicki <root@...>
·
#2478
·
|
|
Re: RFC: Counter driver API
Hi Andre, Tomasz, Jesus,
Thanks for your feedbacks. I updated the API with these feedbacks. Please
correct or if I missed any part that needed to be reflected. The updated API
looks like
Hi Andre, Tomasz, Jesus,
Thanks for your feedbacks. I updated the API with these feedbacks. Please
correct or if I missed any part that needed to be reflected. The updated API
looks like
|
By
Tseng, Kuo-Lang <kuo-lang.tseng@...>
·
#2477
·
|
|
Re: RFC: Use error codes from errno.h
Hi all,
Quoting Jesus Sanchez-Palencia (2016-03-02 16:03:22)
Yes, this is the idea.
Back then, I reviewed the error codes usages and this was what I had in mind:
DEV_OK = 0
DEV_FAIL =
Hi all,
Quoting Jesus Sanchez-Palencia (2016-03-02 16:03:22)
Yes, this is the idea.
Back then, I reviewed the error codes usages and this was what I had in mind:
DEV_OK = 0
DEV_FAIL =
|
By
Andre Guedes <andre.guedes@...>
·
#2476
·
|
|
Re: RFC: Use error codes from errno.h
Hi everyone,
Benjamin Walsh <benjamin.walsh(a)windriver.com> wrote:
After all the feedback so far (thanks, btw!), the updated list now looks like:
DEV_OK = 0
DEV_FAIL =
Hi everyone,
Benjamin Walsh <benjamin.walsh(a)windriver.com> wrote:
After all the feedback so far (thanks, btw!), the updated list now looks like:
DEV_OK = 0
DEV_FAIL =
|
By
Jesus Sanchez-Palencia <jesus.sanchez-palencia@...>
·
#2475
·
|
|
Re: RFC: Use error codes from errno.h
I think -ENOTSUP is a 1-1 match here:
ENOTSUP Operation not supported (POSIX.1)
I think -ENOTSUP is a 1-1 match here:
ENOTSUP Operation not supported (POSIX.1)
|
By
Benjamin Walsh <benjamin.walsh@...>
·
#2474
·
|
|
Re: [RFC] uart: add ISR callback mechanism for UART drivers
Do you have a particular use case in mind, w.r.t. UART, that requires
user data? At this point, the patch is to simply move the IRQ setup
code into the UART drivers. This is not a callback in generic
Do you have a particular use case in mind, w.r.t. UART, that requires
user data? At this point, the patch is to simply move the IRQ setup
code into the UART drivers. This is not a callback in generic
|
By
Daniel Leung <daniel.leung@...>
·
#2473
·
|
|
Re: STM32F103x port
<maciek.borzecki(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Pawel spotted that the linker script was missing. This would prevent people from
actually building the code. I've pushed an update
<maciek.borzecki(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Pawel spotted that the linker script was missing. This would prevent people from
actually building the code. I've pushed an update
|
By
Maciek Borzecki <maciek.borzecki@...>
·
#2472
·
|
|
Re: STM32F103x port
<tomasz.bursztyka(a)linux.intel.com> wrote:
Thanks for the comments. I'll wait for everyone to post theirs and try to
resolve the issues over the weekend.
Cheers,
--
Maciek Borzecki
<tomasz.bursztyka(a)linux.intel.com> wrote:
Thanks for the comments. I'll wait for everyone to post theirs and try to
resolve the issues over the weekend.
Cheers,
--
Maciek Borzecki
|
By
Maciek Borzecki <maciek.borzecki@...>
·
#2471
·
|
|
Re: [RFC] uart: add ISR callback mechanism for UART drivers
Hi Daniel,
I am a bit late on that one. I fully agree on such addition.
1 comment below:
Could be wise to add a void *user_data private pointer through the callback.
It's something we are missing
Hi Daniel,
I am a bit late on that one. I fully agree on such addition.
1 comment below:
Could be wise to add a void *user_data private pointer through the callback.
It's something we are missing
|
By
Tomasz Bursztyka
·
#2470
·
|
|
Re: STM32F103x port
Hi Maciek,
Thanks for the patches, they are very nicely sliced down. It's quite
easy to follow.
Just be aware of the code style we apply. Basically the 2 main errors
are the missing {}
(even for
Hi Maciek,
Thanks for the patches, they are very nicely sliced down. It's quite
easy to follow.
Just be aware of the code style we apply. Basically the 2 main errors
are the missing {}
(even for
|
By
Tomasz Bursztyka
·
#2467
·
|
|
Re: Newbie wants to contribute
Hi!
You can start by reading our documentation:
https://www.zephyrproject.org/doc/collaboration/collaboration.html
Any question, just ask in users(a)lists.zephyrproject.org or in
Hi!
You can start by reading our documentation:
https://www.zephyrproject.org/doc/collaboration/collaboration.html
Any question, just ask in users(a)lists.zephyrproject.org or in
|
By
Perez Hernandez, Javier B <javier.b.perez.hernandez@...>
·
#2469
·
|
|
Re: RFC: Use error codes from errno.h
Hi Daniel,
<daniel.kalowsky(a)intel.com> wrote:
Hi Daniel,
<daniel.kalowsky(a)intel.com> wrote:
|
By
Luiz Augusto von Dentz
·
#2468
·
|
|
Re: [RFC v2] uart: add ISR callback mechanism for UART drivers
Hi Daniel,
Quoting Daniel Leung (2016-03-02 22:35:24)
No, I don't have anything in particular. Probably the bluetooth drivers
and the console_uart driver are a good source of use cases. For
Hi Daniel,
Quoting Daniel Leung (2016-03-02 22:35:24)
No, I don't have anything in particular. Probably the bluetooth drivers
and the console_uart driver are a good source of use cases. For
|
By
Andre Guedes <andre.guedes@...>
·
#2466
·
|
|
[RFC] Sensor API
Hi everyone,
I have uploaded a new iteration of the sensor API patches to Gerrit, you
can find them at [1]. We hope to address some of the concerns regarding
memory consumption of sensor
Hi everyone,
I have uploaded a new iteration of the sensor API patches to Gerrit, you
can find them at [1]. We hope to address some of the concerns regarding
memory consumption of sensor
|
By
Vlad Dogaru <vlad.dogaru@...>
·
#2465
·
|
|
Re: STM32F103x port
I'm sure all of you already got their emails with incoming review
request. For others who might be interested as well, I've posted a
series of patches to
I'm sure all of you already got their emails with incoming review
request. For others who might be interested as well, I've posted a
series of patches to
|
By
Maciek Borzecki <maciek.borzecki@...>
·
#2464
·
|
|
Re: RFC: Counter driver API
Hi Andre,
I missed the idea that DEV_* will anyway be mapped to errno, so keep
DEV_* yes.
Actually, follow Jesus's comment. counter_set_alarm() should not star
the counter.
If you are using 1
Hi Andre,
I missed the idea that DEV_* will anyway be mapped to errno, so keep
DEV_* yes.
Actually, follow Jesus's comment. counter_set_alarm() should not star
the counter.
If you are using 1
|
By
Tomasz Bursztyka
·
#2462
·
|