[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx-testing] liuguo09 commented on issue #13: docker: initial checkin Dockerfile for nuttx github action container

liuguo09 commented on issue #13: docker: initial checkin Dockerfile for nuttx github action container URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx-testing/pull/13#issuecomment-599889055 > My plan was to use the incubator-nuttx-testing repo. I can submit a PR with this and the action to

Build failed in Jenkins: NuttX-Nightly-Build #66

See Changes: -- [...truncated 503.92 KB...] Copy files Select CONFIG_HOST_LINUX=y Refreshing... Building NuttX...

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx-testing] btashton edited a comment on issue #13: docker: initial checkin Dockerfile for nuttx github action container

btashton edited a comment on issue #13: docker: initial checkin Dockerfile for nuttx github action container URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx-testing/pull/13#issuecomment-599870749 My plan was to use the incubator-nuttx-testing repo. I can submit a PR with this and the

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx-testing] btashton commented on issue #13: docker: initial checkin Dockerfile for nuttx github action container

btashton commented on issue #13: docker: initial checkin Dockerfile for nuttx github action container URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx-testing/pull/13#issuecomment-599870749 My plan was to use the incubator-nuttx-testing container. I can submit a PR with this and the action

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx-testing] xiaoxiang781216 merged pull request #14: cibuild.sh: switch to use the recent bitbucket tools repo

xiaoxiang781216 merged pull request #14: cibuild.sh: switch to use the recent bitbucket tools repo URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx-testing/pull/14 This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx-testing] liuguo09 commented on issue #13: docker: initial checkin Dockerfile for nuttx github action container

liuguo09 commented on issue #13: docker: initial checkin Dockerfile for nuttx github action container URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx-testing/pull/13#issuecomment-599860083 Or is it possible just using the incubator-nuttx-testing to hold dockerfile and do docker publish

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx-testing] liuguo09 commented on issue #13: docker: initial checkin Dockerfile for nuttx github action container

liuguo09 commented on issue #13: docker: initial checkin Dockerfile for nuttx github action container URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx-testing/pull/13#issuecomment-599857989 Yes, I noticed the docker publish github aciton. It seems more flexible than docker hub. If taking

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx-testing] btashton commented on issue #13: docker: initial checkin Dockerfile for nuttx github action container

btashton commented on issue #13: docker: initial checkin Dockerfile for nuttx github action container URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx-testing/pull/13#issuecomment-599852966 Did you notice that the docker container is now built via actions and stored in the GitHub package

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx-testing] liuguo09 commented on issue #13: docker: initial checkin Dockerfile for nuttx github action container

liuguo09 commented on issue #13: docker: initial checkin Dockerfile for nuttx github action container URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx-testing/pull/13#issuecomment-599851653 > @liuguo09 Sorry this took me so long. Have a look at what I have done over here: >

Re: SAMA5D27 SDMMC support branch

Takeyoshi, I pushed some more files to the SDMMC branch— changing the IMXRT_HSDC to SAMA5_SDMMC throughout. It probably doesn't compile. I'll work on the registers and other problems tomorrow. -adam On Sat, Mar 7, 2020 at 6:19 PM Adam Feuer wrote: > Cool. I'll see if I can work on the imxrt

Re: Nuttx Code Formatter Progress [Was RE: Should we relax precheck a little bit?]

Yes, it may be horrible. Please don't look at the results right now then... this is a work in progress. Okay.  Thanks for clarifying that.  nxstyle is still your friend.

Re: Nuttx Code Formatter Progress [Was RE: Should we relax precheck a little bit?]

 ...  It is simply not following the NuttX coding standard. Perhaps what you should do is also run the modified files through nxstyle.  nxstyle, like most tools, is imperfect but it is the yardstick we use to evaluating conformance to the coding standard now.  Certainly a first step would

Re: Nuttx Code Formatter Progress [Was RE: Should we relax precheck a little bit?]

Hi Greg, Yes, it may be horrible. Please don't look at the results right now then... this is a work in progress. I'm just trying to do the development and coordination in the open, as the Apache folks have asked— no off-list communication, right? I just posted these so David and others could

Re: Nuttx Code Formatter Progress [Was RE: Should we relax precheck a little bit?]

I mentioned in the previous email that the tools was screwing up vertifcal alignment is places where it is recommend and in places where is it required.  Here is an example of the later: * sched/irq/irq.h

Re: Nuttx Code Formatter Progress [Was RE: Should we relax precheck a little bit?]

Here's a Github compare with .clang-format file and the results when clang-format-9 is run on all the files under sched/: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/compare/master...starcat-io:explore/clang-format-sched If anyone has comments or observations I would love to know them. That

Re: Nuttx Code Formatter Progress [Was RE: Should we relax precheck a little bit?]

Here's a Github compare with .clang-format file and the results when clang-format-9 is run on all the files under sched/: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/compare/master...starcat-io:explore/clang-format-sched If anyone has comments or observations I would love to know them. -adam On

Re: Nuttx Code Formatter Progress [Was RE: Should we relax precheck a little bit?]

David, It would be a --style=NuttX option on the command line, and a set of configurations. But yes that might be the way to go. I don't think forking it would be the right thing, if we can modify it to do what we want, we should be able to add options that are configurable, submit PRs and get

ILCA for large changes

Are we making sure that people have ILCAs on file for some of these large changes that are going in? It is my understanding that for anything non trivial we need to have one. --Brennan

USB Host porting - Reset before SetAddress

Hi Greg and all, Generally enumeration sequence of USB (from host perspective) is - start with address 0, (i) Get the device descriptor (DD) (ii) note the control endpoint (EP0) size of device (iii) configure the EP0 of host to EP0 of device (iv) Get the complete 18 bytes of DD (v) Reset the

Re: Should we relax precheck a little bit?

Part of the discussion on whitelisting for nxstyle went on on the Github PR: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/569 To draw a conclusion from my side, I withdraw my supposal, because of "no metadata in source files". I will have a look at the .nxignore solution and if I find time I