xiaoxiang781216 commented on issue #17567:
URL: https://github.com/apache/nuttx/issues/17567#issuecomment-3714555539

   > [@Fix-Point](https://github.com/Fix-Point)
   > 
   > This is my final response to you,
   > 
   > 1. The current HRTIMER implementation is based on the AMP mode. While it 
is not perfect, it is indeed functional.
   >    We can collaborate on optimizing this implementation. If you identify 
any flaws, please contribute to improving it.
   > 2. Your words and deeds have proven that you are engaging in factional 
disputes. I have exercised great restraint in responding to your remarks. 
Similar issues arose during the previous optimization of the tick-to-counter 
mechanism.
   > 3. Test cases have already been provided in [sched/sched: Part 1: add high 
resolution timer (hrtimer) only (without os tick support with hrtimer) for 
NuttX #17517](https://github.com/apache/nuttx/pull/17517). If you believe there 
are defects, please enhance the test cases so that we can collectively refine 
them, instead of creating a dedicated thread to disparage others' work and tout 
your own.
   > 
   > I will not respond to someone as unprofessional as you anymore. Please 
refrain from @mentioning me in the future. Thank you.
   
   @anchao your statement is totally unfair, the initial implementation 
contains some critical bugs which should be fixed before merging(please 
reference: https://github.com/apache/nuttx/pull/17642). So, I would suggesst 
you don't merge the critical change like this before ALL comments from either 
PMC/contributor or normal developer get resolved, which is also enforced by the 
community rule now.


-- 
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]

Reply via email to