Skip to content

Fix for targets where DEVICE_SPI or DEVICE_INTERRUPTIN are defined but not both #13472

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Aug 24, 2020
Merged

Conversation

talorion
Copy link
Contributor

Summary of changes

Fixed a missmatch in the guards in NanostackRfPhyAtmel.h and NanostackRfPhyAT86RF215.cpp
the problem is better described in #13299
basically when either DEVICE_SPI or DEVICE_INTERRUPTIN are defined but not both we running Into the problem that the guards in NanostackRfPhyAtmel.h do not match the ones in NanostackRfPhyAT86RF215.cpp
I added a guard in rfbits.h which checks if DEVICE_SPI is defined since the file clearly requires SPI.

Impact of changes

on some custom targets where DEVICE_SPI or DEVICE_INTERRUPTIN are defined but not both the build fails

Migration actions required

Documentation

None

Pull request type

[X] Patch update (Bug fix / Target update / Docs update / Test update / Refactor)
[] Feature update (New feature / Functionality change / New API)
[] Major update (Breaking change E.g. Return code change / API behaviour change)

Test results

[] No Tests required for this change (E.g docs only update)
[X] Covered by existing mbed-os tests (Greentea or Unittest)
[] Tests / results supplied as part of this PR

Reviewers


@talorion
Copy link
Contributor Author

talorion commented Aug 21, 2020

copy of #13471
i accedentally force pushed the master, re-created the PR with cleaner commit history

@ciarmcom ciarmcom added the release-type: patch Indentifies a PR as containing just a patch label Aug 21, 2020
@ciarmcom ciarmcom requested a review from a team August 21, 2020 08:30
@ciarmcom
Copy link
Member

@talorion, thank you for your changes.
@ARMmbed/mbed-os-maintainers please review.

@mergify mergify bot added needs: CI and removed needs: review labels Aug 21, 2020
@0xc0170
Copy link
Contributor

0xc0170 commented Aug 21, 2020

CI started

@mbed-ci
Copy link

mbed-ci commented Aug 21, 2020

Jenkins CI Test : ✔️ SUCCESS

Build Number: 1 | 🔒 Jenkins CI Job | 🌐 Logs & Artifacts

CLICK for Detailed Summary

jobs Status
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_unittests ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-GCC_ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_greentea-test ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_dynamic-memory-usage ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_cloud-client-pytest ✔️

@0xc0170 0xc0170 changed the title Fixed compile error on targets where DEVICE_SPI or DEVICE_INTERRUPTIN are defined but not both Fix for targets where DEVICE_SPI or DEVICE_INTERRUPTIN are defined but not both Aug 24, 2020
@0xc0170
Copy link
Contributor

0xc0170 commented Aug 24, 2020

@artokin can you review - the drivers changes to rf, should be also upstream?

@artokin artokin requested a review from JarkkoPaso August 24, 2020 08:05
@artokin
Copy link
Contributor

artokin commented Aug 24, 2020

LGTM, @JarkkoPaso , would you please check also?

@0xc0170 0xc0170 merged commit 1950ac6 into ARMmbed:master Aug 24, 2020
@mergify mergify bot removed the ready for merge label Aug 24, 2020
@0xc0170
Copy link
Contributor

0xc0170 commented Aug 24, 2020

Thank you @artokin @JarkkoPaso

@artokin
Copy link
Contributor

artokin commented Aug 24, 2020

@0xc0170 , changes will be backported to mbed-os-5.15 via https://github.com/ARMmbed/atmel-rf-driver repository

@mbedmain mbedmain added release-version: 6.3.0 Release-pending and removed release-type: patch Indentifies a PR as containing just a patch Release-pending labels Sep 14, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants