-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 196
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
Feature/static allocation #169
Feature/static allocation #169
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Cervenka Dusan <cervenka@acrios.com>
Signed-off-by: Cervenka Dusan <cervenka@acrios.com>
Signed-off-by: Cervenka Dusan <cervenka@acrios.com>
Signed-off-by: Cervenka Dusan <cervenka@acrios.com>
Signed-off-by: Cervenka Dusan <cervenka@acrios.com>
Thank you, Dusan, quite massive changes to be reviewed and tested, let's target these changes for the next release (after v1.8.1 release), ok? Thanks. |
Hi @MichalPrincNXP , yes sure ;) |
Signed-off-by: Cervenka Dusan <cervenka@acrios.com>
@MichalPrincNXP That is great. Sorry i don't know what you are asking for. Normal procedure is fine for us (review and merge into develop branch) |
I see conflicts, i can resolve them. Not sure if Manually constructed changes PR was merged. |
Conflicts should be solved. |
Signed-off-by: Cervenka Dusan <cervenka@acrios.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This PR is linked with #168 and will be integrated together. Nevertheless, this does not allow static allocation of all erpc objects and the work on the static allocations needs to continue (information for others looking at this PR). "Known issues and limitations" section should be added into the wiki with following statement:
Static allocations controlled by the ERPC_ALLOCATION_POLICY config macro are not fully supported yet, i.e. not all erpc objects can be allocated statically now. It deals with the ongoing process and the full static allocations support will be added in the future.
Thank you for the effort! |
More static memory usage possibility (still shim code not fully supporting and not all transports are using new macros).
PR which should be merged after these: #153 #168