-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
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
mpsl: fem: increase initialization priority #10120
mpsl: fem: increase initialization priority #10120
Conversation
Front-End Module initialization is a dependency of HCI driver initialization. Increase its priority so that there's a clear hierarchy between them. Signed-off-by: Jędrzej Ciupis <jedrzej.ciupis@nordicsemi.no>
Test specificationCI/Jenkins/NRF
CI/Jenkins/integration
Detailed information of selected test modules Note: This message is automatically posted and updated by the CI |
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.
Is it worth mentioning in the commit message that this fixes an issue with the output power?
@@ -293,7 +293,7 @@ static int mpsl_fem_init(const struct device *dev) | |||
return fem_nrf21540_gpio_configure(); | |||
} | |||
|
|||
SYS_INIT(mpsl_fem_init, POST_KERNEL, CONFIG_KERNEL_INIT_PRIORITY_DEVICE); | |||
SYS_INIT(mpsl_fem_init, POST_KERNEL, CONFIG_KERNEL_INIT_PRIORITY_DEFAULT); |
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.
I'm afraid if this is done this way at some point we will forget, why the change was introduced. Is there any way to make this initialization priority relative to SDC initialization priority?
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.
One way that comes to my mind is that there could be a dedicated Kconfig option representing MPSL FEM initialization priority and another one representing HCI driver initialization priority. We could then give them correct default values and put a build assert to enforce the dependency. It feels to be a bit of an overkill though. What do you think? Do you have other ideas?
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 would be exactly the approach I think I would choose.
It's easier to track dependencies between initialization priorities if they have their own Kconfig entries. Signed-off-by: Jędrzej Ciupis <jedrzej.ciupis@nordicsemi.no>
The new Kconfig option is used for a build assert to enforce an explicit dependency on initialization priority of MPSL FEM. Signed-off-by: Jędrzej Ciupis <jedrzej.ciupis@nordicsemi.no>
I would really like you to update the commit message to describe what problem you are trying to solve |
You can find the documentation preview for this PR at this link. It will be updated about 10 minutes after the documentation build succeeds. Note: This comment is automatically posted by the Documentation Publishing GitHub Action. |
Maybe #10143 does the same thing? |
Superseded by #10143 |
Front-End Module initialization is a dependency of HCI driver initialization. Increase its priority so that there's a clear hierarchy between them.
Signed-off-by: Jędrzej Ciupis jedrzej.ciupis@nordicsemi.no