-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
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
usrsock:refine usrsock's architecture #6949
Conversation
@ethanlcz please fetch the last code and rebase your change. |
6d75e89
to
1a60ba6
Compare
done |
@ethanlcz, @xiaoxiang781216 |
1a60ba6
to
47f10fe
Compare
fix the conflict after usrsock reconstruct: apache/nuttx#6949 Signed-off-by: Xiang Xiao <xiaoxiang@xiaomi.com>
The break is fixed here: apache/nuttx-apps#1301 |
47f10fe
to
fa0d34c
Compare
fix the conflict after usrsock reconstruct: apache/nuttx#6949 Signed-off-by: Xiang Xiao <xiaoxiang@xiaomi.com>
fa0d34c
to
91f96d7
Compare
91f96d7
to
6bb1c09
Compare
@ethanlcz
|
I will try this project later after I get the test board. |
|
I tried both spresense:wifi_smp and spresense:wifi, but the board fail to bootup, uart log show the following assert information: It seems the communication between spresense board and GS2200M modules goes wrong. |
@ethanlcz |
Thanks Masayuki ! |
b032d4d
to
902f698
Compare
@ethanlcz need rebase the change again. |
1aabad5
to
d125639
Compare
@masayuki2009 spresense:wifi_smp should work with latest patchset now. |
352e4a1
to
8fa042d
Compare
done |
@hmm, The assertion still happens with the latest code.
|
I can reproduce it now with all the following options enabled(last time I only enabled CONFIG_DEBUG_ASSERTIONS=y), let me check what happened. CONFIG_DEBUG_ASSERTIONS=y |
8fa042d
to
fb9e570
Compare
@xiaoxiang781216 @masayuki2009 |
fb9e570
to
4cb9d0d
Compare
LGTM, @masayuki2009 could you try it again? Thanks. |
f9ed8d1
to
5264777
Compare
@ethanlcz Without this PR,
With this PR,
|
5264777
to
8a04604
Compare
Deadlock happened between net_lock and devsem(in usrsock_dev.c) and it is now fixed. |
Seperate usrsock device driver with usrsock core function layer to make it more flexiable to adopt other kind of usrsock interface driver Signed-off-by: liangchaozhong <liangchaozhong@xiaomi.com>
8a04604
to
f79e6ef
Compare
@masayuki2009 |
@masayuki2009 can the last version pass your test? @ethanlcz has more patches depend on this change. |
@ethanlcz |
fix the conflict after usrsock reconstruct: apache/nuttx#6949
fix the conflict after usrsock reconstruct: apache/nuttx#6949 Signed-off-by: Xiang Xiao <xiaoxiang@xiaomi.com>
Summary
Seperate usrsock device driver with usrsock core function layer
to make it more flexiable to adopt other kind of usrsock interface driver
Impact
Code refactor only, the behaviour should be same as before
Testing