Hi Matteo,

Don't feel bad about it, because this move will be important to find a
solution to get uORB sensors improved to work as character devices without
increasing memory usage too much!

BR,

Alan

On Wednesday, December 3, 2025, Matteo Golin <[email protected]> wrote:

> That's fair and I agree. I just felt bad in this case because floating
> point support on AVR is tricky. But, like I mentioned, maybe Raiden's
> modifications could be used here.
>
> Matteo
>
> On Wed, Dec 3, 2025, 6:39 AM Alan C. Assis <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Hi KR,
> >
> > I'm also confused, I understood that char device sensor shouldn't be
> merged
> > anymore, see the discussion here:
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/nuttx/pull/17363
> >
> > This PR was merged after requesting him to remove the char device sensor
> > from his original commit.
> >
> > So, I think it isn't fair not to accept his QMI8658 char device sensor,
> but
> > to accept your TC74 char device sensor.
> >
> > Matteo, I suggest we convert the TC74 sensor to uORB and not integrate it
> > as a char device, to be coherent with what we did to Huang Qi.
> >
> > Tomek, since you are taking care of these patch sets, could you work on
> > this conversion after you return from your delegation trip?
> > If you need, I can help you with that.
> >
> > BR,
> >
> > Alan
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 3, 2025 at 7:28 AM <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > just a bit of a clarification, I think there was a bit of
> > > misunderstanding
> > >
> > > On 2025-12-02 21:05, Alan C. Assis wrote:
> > > > Hi KR,
> > > >
> > > > The previous PR with QMI8658 sensor that was merged is uORB, the
> > > > ordinary
> > > > char device sensor was removed from the final PR.
> > >
> > > In my previous message, I was not advocating for merging this driver in
> > > its current form. When I said that another driver was merged, I meant
> > > the one you're talking about, but only in the context of git merge
> > > conflict. (Another driver was merged - changed Kconfig etc. - my driver
> > > is in conflict now.) I did not even know it had the char device feature
> > > before being merged, I don't follow the development that closely.
> > >
> > > Anyway, I think that PRs #17405 can be closed now. As suggested, I
> won't
> > > be spending time on the driver in its current form and I will not have
> > > any time to rework it at least until the end of the year. Same for
> > > #17406 which depends on #17405.
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to