nuttxpr commented on PR #15163: URL: https://github.com/apache/nuttx/pull/15163#issuecomment-2538947315
[**\[Experimental Bot, please feedback here\]**](https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Aapache%2Fnuttx+13552&type=issues) No, this PR does not fully meet the NuttX requirements. While it provides a summary and mentions testing, it lacks crucial details. Here's what's missing: * **Summary:** Needs more detail. *How* does the small lock protect `f_refs`? What *exactly* was the regression from the linked PR? What functional part of the code changed (e.g., VFS, a specific filesystem)? * **Impact:** The current description is insufficient. Address *all* impact points with "YES" or "NO" and provide descriptions for any "YES" responses. Consider: * **User Impact:** Will applications using the affected filesystem notice any changes? * **Build Impact:** Are any new build dependencies introduced? * **Hardware Impact:** Does this affect any specific architectures or boards? * **Documentation Impact:** Does this change require documentation updates? * **Security Impact:** Does using a smaller lock introduce or mitigate any security vulnerabilities? * **Compatibility Impact:** Does this break compatibility with any existing code or applications? * **Testing:** "ci ostest" is not enough. Provide specific details about the build host (OS, CPU, compiler) and the target(s) (architecture, board, configuration). Include *actual* test logs before and after the change, demonstrating the issue and the fix. Just stating that it passed CI isn't sufficient for review; the reviewer needs to see the evidence. The PR needs to be significantly expanded to meet the requirements and be properly reviewed. -- 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]
