Changes to facilitate arduino-cli support #138
Conversation
| struct timespec { | ||
| long long tv_sec; /* seconds */ | ||
| long tv_nsec; /* and nanoseconds */ | ||
| }; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
AVR doesn't have timespec to hold the time when you first load the program. MBED does, so I just made the custom timespec struct to hold it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hm. I don't understand what you mean. Is there some external dependency we are linking with that needs this struct defined?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm also a bit puzzled by this code. Do we actually need it?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Inside of reactor_common.c, when we initialize we have the following set of code:
LF_PRINT_DEBUG("Start time: " PRINTF_TIME "ns", start_time);
struct timespec physical_time_timespec = {physical_start_time / BILLION, physical_start_time % BILLION};
printf("---- Start execution at time %s---- plus %ld nanoseconds.\n",
ctime(&physical_time_timespec.tv_sec), physical_time_timespec.tv_nsec);
This is the only place the timespec is referenced for the Arduino lifecycle, but I myself don't know what purpose this has.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For MBED systems like the BLE Sense Boards, timespec struct is already defined, but AVR doesn't have it formally defined. To prevent the system from breaking, I simply hardcoded the timespec struct. That said, I still don't know the underlying purpose of the struct if we simply read to and from the struct and have it get discarded later?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks like a remnant of early code that used stuct timespec directly. If physical_time_timespec isn't used anywhere else and there is not other use of struct timespec then I suggest removing it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It looks like the federated reactor still needs timespec and I'm currently working on federated support for Arduino so I think it's best to keep it.
|
Good work. The test failure is related to #133. I don't know when this started or what the cause is. We should look into it at some point. But just re-run the failing tests and it always just works |
|
One comment I had for @erlingrj is the reason behind removing using Arduino delay functionality? I must have missed when this was taken out. |
|
Could you clarify what is the delay functionality? Do you mean using busy-wait with lf_clock_gettine rather than delay for sleep? That is for supporting physical actions that interrupt the sleep |
lhstrh
changed the title
Minor changes are needed in reactor-c to faciliate arduino-cli support. Compiles successfully locally with changes in LFC