Skip to content
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

Cellular: Initialize CellularContext member variables in correct class #10557

Merged
merged 1 commit into from May 15, 2019

Conversation

Projects
None yet
7 participants
@jarvte
Copy link
Contributor

commented May 10, 2019

Description

CellularContext member variables were initialized in inheriting class.
Now in base class where they should be initialized so that every inheriting
class don't have to init them.

Pull request type

[X] Fix
[ ] Refactor
[ ] Target update
[ ] Functionality change
[ ] Docs update
[ ] Test update
[ ] Breaking change

Reviewers

@AnttiKauppila

Release Notes

Cellular: Initialize CellularContext member variables in correct class
CellularContext member variables were initialized in inheriting class.
Now in base class where they should be initialized so that every inheriting
class don't have to init them.

@ciarmcom ciarmcom requested review from AnttiKauppila and ARMmbed/mbed-os-maintainers May 10, 2019

@ciarmcom

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented May 10, 2019

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

@@ -19,6 +19,15 @@

namespace mbed {

CellularContext::CellularContext() : _next(0), _stack(0), _pdp_type(DEFAULT_PDP_TYPE),

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@AriParkkila

AriParkkila May 10, 2019

Contributor

Should be inited in the same order as declared in header?

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@jarvte

jarvte May 10, 2019

Author Contributor

Yes, and they are what I can tell. Please tell which are not in correct order.

@0xc0170 0xc0170 added needs: CI and removed needs: review labels May 13, 2019

@0xc0170

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented May 13, 2019

CI started

@mbed-ci

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented May 13, 2019

Test run: FAILED

Summary: 1 of 7 test jobs failed
Build number : 1
Build artifacts

Failed test jobs:

  • jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-ARM
@0xc0170

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented May 14, 2019

CI restarted

@mbed-ci

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented May 14, 2019

Test run: FAILED

Summary: 1 of 11 test jobs failed
Build number : 2
Build artifacts

Failed test jobs:

  • jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_cloud-client-test

@0xc0170 0xc0170 merged commit 26aa16f into ARMmbed:master May 15, 2019

26 checks passed

continuous-integration/jenkins/pr-head This commit looks good
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
jenkins-ci/build-ARM Success
Details
jenkins-ci/build-GCC_ARM Success
Details
jenkins-ci/build-IAR Success
Details
jenkins-ci/cloud-client-test Success
Details
jenkins-ci/dynamic-memory-usage Success
Details
jenkins-ci/exporter Success
Details
jenkins-ci/greentea-test Success
Details
jenkins-ci/mbed2-build-ARM Success
Details
jenkins-ci/mbed2-build-GCC_ARM Success
Details
jenkins-ci/mbed2-build-IAR Success
Details
jenkins-ci/unittests Success
Details
travis-ci/astyle Success!
Details
travis-ci/docs Success!
Details
travis-ci/doxy-spellcheck Success!
Details
travis-ci/events Success! Runtime is 8590 cycles.
Details
travis-ci/gitattributestest Success!
Details
travis-ci/include_check Success!
Details
travis-ci/licence_check Success!
Details
travis-ci/littlefs Success! Code size is 8448B.
Details
travis-ci/psa-autogen Success!
Details
travis-ci/tools-py2.7 Success!
Details
travis-ci/tools-py3.5 Success!
Details
travis-ci/tools-py3.6 Success!
Details
travis-ci/tools-py3.7 Success!
Details

@jarvte jarvte deleted the jarvte:fix_cellularcontext_init branch May 15, 2019

@adbridge

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented May 17, 2019

There is something strange, conflict wise, with both this and the related 10554 and neither will patch across to 5.12. Thus bumping to 5.13.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.