On Sat, Nov 29, 2025 at 2:28 PM <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> thanks for doing the split - my intention was to order the patches in
> the series so it can be cut at any point to still produce correct
> result. As in fixes first, then new features in order of likelyhood of
> being merged. That way - I thought - would make it possible to simply
> create some sort of "mergeable" branch up to and including the last
> acceptable commit from the PR without causing more work for someone
> else. Did not work, hopefully I'll remember to just split things as much
> as possible/reasonable from the outset next time. (If not, you can
> remind me to do that instead of doing the work yourself.)

No worries, thanks for adapting branches, I am leaving for a week son
so maybe we can make it before end of weekend :-)

All 3 updated branches pushed to GH :-)

> As for the comments:
>
> - the coding style errors in avrdx_lowconsole.c and avrdx_init.c are
> fixed. Turns out I forgot to checkpatch some files, sorry about that.
> Updated branches are avrdx_twi_rfc1-4 and avrdx_twi_rfc1-2. To be sure,
> I scanned the series as a whole now and it should hopefully be
> everything.

Some more typos caught:

https://github.com/apache/nuttx/actions/runs/19786767210/job/56694309909?pr=17404

../nuttx/tools/checkpatch.sh -c -u -m -g
48585b21b5b045541032b02dcea21e1240360ffa..HEAD
Used config files:
1: .codespellrc
/home/runner/work/nuttx/nuttx/nuttx/Documentation/platforms/avr/avrdx/docs/twi.rst:48:
mesages ==> messages
/home/runner/work/nuttx/nuttx/nuttx/arch/avr/src/avrdx/Kconfig:417:
accross ==> across
/home/runner/work/nuttx/nuttx/nuttx/arch/avr/src/avrdx/Kconfig:485:
accross ==> across
/home/runner/work/nuttx/nuttx/nuttx/arch/avr/src/avrdx/avrdx_twi.c:1352:
overriden ==> overridden

I fixed them already lets see the CI status now :-)



> - the TC74Ax driver not being uORB - well, I was not sure whether to
> submit the driver at all exactly because it is not done the new way. But
> then I noticed another such driver was merged in August so I posted it.
> As for the reasons why the driver is not done the new way, there are
> two:
>
> First - I did not read the documentation. Over my previous submissions,
> I was never able to find any howto for writing drivers. As in "if you
> want to make driver for X, do this." (Do not take this as a criticism
> please, I was thinking about writing such howto but every time I was
> done with a feature, it seemed to me that there is actually nothing to
> write about because everything is simple, clear and pretty obvious.) So
> I got into the habit of simply looking at other code that does the same
> thing and adapting it. Only after the driver was almost done, I found
> the documents you linked.
>
> The other reason - and the reason why I did not decide to rewrite the
> driver - is that unless I misunderstood the documentation, the new way
> uses floats to exchange data and seems more complex overall. My intended
> use case is currently 8-bit AVR and I am even not able to compile code
> that has floats in it. (That can be probably fixed easily by upgrading
> to newer gcc.) Moreover, floats are expensive to handle. So to put it
> simple, if I did the driver this way, it would not be of much use to me.
>
> All in all, if the driver gets rejected because it uses deprecated
> interface, that would be completely understandable from my point of
> view. However, I have to say that I am not planning to rewrite it in any
> forseeable future (maybe if it proved easy to have it configurable for
> both interfaces - judging from bmp180 driver it could be - but I don't
> think I'll find the time even in such case.)
>
> - the enum in the TC74Ax driver - changed to
> TC74AX_OPERATION_MODE_STANDBY/OPERATING. As usual, this was based on
> another driver. Fixed version is in avrdx_twi_rfc1-3 branch.
>
> Let me know if I missed anything.

Raiden already reaised an issue on GH about floats in uORG and there
is a proposition to use fixed point built time alternative, please
take a look here:

https://github.com/apache/nuttx/issues/10644

I will start a mailing list discussion in a moment this seems important :-)

Thanks! :-)

Tomek

--
CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info

Reply via email to