nuttxpr commented on PR #2604: URL: https://github.com/apache/nuttx-apps/pull/2604#issuecomment-2376689509
[**\[Experimental Bot, please feedback here\]**](https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Aapache%2Fnuttx+13552&type=issues) The provided PR summary and information lack essential details to determine if it meets NuttX requirements. **Here's a breakdown of missing information and suggestions for improvement:** **Summary:** * **Why is this change necessary?** Clearly state the problem this module solves. Is it a common need in NuttX projects? Does it improve performance, add a missing functionality, etc.? * **What functional part is changed?** Be specific. Which directory is modified? Mention if this introduces a new API for other developers. * **How does the change work?** The code snippet is helpful, but a high-level explanation is crucial for reviewers. For example: * How does the `urob_loop` interact with the Orb? * How does epoll integration work? * What are the key data structures and their roles? * **Issues/PRs:** Provide links to related NuttX and NuttX Apps issues/PRs if applicable. This helps track the context and need for the change. **Impact:** * **It's highly unlikely that a change has *no* impact.** Carefully consider each point: * **New feature:** Clearly state that a new feature is added. * **User impact:** Will users need to call new functions, change configurations, etc.? * **Build impact:** Are there new build options, dependencies to consider? * **Hardware impact:** Does this rely on specific hardware features? * **Documentation:** At the very least, the new module needs to be documented. Mention if you've updated the docs. * **Security:** Analyze for potential security implications. Even if there are none, state it explicitly. * **Compatibility:** Does this break existing code? Are there forward or backward compatibility concerns? **Testing:** * **Testing is insufficient.** * Provide more descriptive logs demonstrating the functionality of the module. * Ideally, include test cases that cover different usage scenarios, error handling, etc. * Test on real hardware if possible, in addition to the simulator. **In summary, the PR needs significant improvements in clarity, completeness, and testing before it can be considered for merging.** -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
