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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

boards: xtensa: m5stack_atom_lite: initial support #68190

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Apr 1, 2024
Merged

boards: xtensa: m5stack_atom_lite: initial support #68190

merged 1 commit into from Apr 1, 2024

Conversation

Trifunik
Copy link
Contributor

Source code of board/xtensa/m5stickc_plus and board/xtensa/m5stack_atoms3_lite were adapted for an inital support of the M5Stack ATOM Lite board.

@Trifunik Trifunik force-pushed the boards_xtensa_m5stack_atom_lite branch 2 times, most recently from 87c6178 to b58c103 Compare January 28, 2024 00:10
kartben
kartben reviewed Jan 28, 2024
View reviewed changes
boards/xtensa/m5stack_atom_lite/doc/img/m5stack_atom_lite.png Outdated
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please look at using webp format for smaller file size, and use an illustration that's only the board's picture to be more consistent with other boards.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

done

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@kartben: Can you please check again? Thank you!

@Trifunik Trifunik force-pushed the boards_xtensa_m5stack_atom_lite branch from b58c103 to 051e3d2 Compare January 28, 2024 09:21
@Trifunik Trifunik requested a review from kartben January 28, 2024 19:18
@Trifunik Trifunik force-pushed the boards_xtensa_m5stack_atom_lite branch 3 times, most recently from 3f51a76 to 8e84c84 Compare March 26, 2024 23:29
kartben
kartben requested changes Mar 27, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@kartben kartben left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks! Looks good to me except for a small documentation typo. Will add a few Espressif folks to help with reviewing this

boards/m5stack/m5stack_atom_lite/doc/index.rst Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@Trifunik
boards: xtensa: m5stack_atom_lite: initial support
fb36385 
Source code of board/m5stack/m5stickc_plus and
board/m5stack/m5stack_atoms3_lite were adapted for an inital
support of the M5Stack ATOM Lite board.

Signed-off-by: Nikola Trifunovic <nikola@trifunovic.at>
@Trifunik Trifunik force-pushed the boards_xtensa_m5stack_atom_lite branch from 8e84c84 to fb36385 Compare March 27, 2024 08:52
@Trifunik Trifunik requested a review from kartben March 27, 2024 10:59
sylvioalves
sylvioalves reviewed Mar 27, 2024
View reviewed changes
boards/m5stack/m5stack_atom_lite/m5stack_atom_lite_esp32_appcpu.dts
};

/* Reserve 256kB for the scratch partition */
scratch_partition: partition@210000 {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@kartben @nordicjm Should we start requesting to not having scratch area at all? Or better keep this until mcuboot has updated it accordingly?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Up to you as the vendor but scratch hasn't been needed in MCUboot for years, see 9a84258

@Trifunik
Copy link
Contributor Author

Trifunik commented Mar 28, 2024 •
edited

Hello, many thanks for the quick review!
Unfortunately, after the last push a twister test failed. Does anybody know,
how I can connect the administrator if twister writes: “Executing the custom container implementation failed. Please contact your self hosted runner administrator.” ?
I also don’t understand this error. Because the failed test is for qemu_x86_64 and I have not changed anything in this part of the source code.

Update: The error looks similar to this one #60947

@Trifunik
Copy link
Contributor Author

@nordicjm: Thank you for rerunning the tests! Unfortunately, it failed again. How severe is this failure?
Because as I understand, this pull request will not be merged until all checks are successful. But the errors are happening on the qemu_x86_64 architecture and this has nothing to do with my esp32 based board.

Many thanks in advance!
Nikola

@kartben
Copy link
Collaborator

kartben commented Mar 31, 2024

@nordicjm: Thank you for rerunning the tests! Unfortunately, it failed again. How severe is this failure? Because as I understand, this pull request will not be merged until all checks are successful. But the errors are happening on the qemu_x86_64 architecture and this has nothing to do with my esp32 based board.

Many thanks in advance! Nikola

I re-ran the job and it passed

@fabiobaltieri fabiobaltieri merged commit f7f5c44 into zephyrproject-rtos:main Apr 1, 2024
21 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@nordicjm nordicjm nordicjm left review comments

@kartben kartben kartben approved these changes

@sylvioalves sylvioalves sylvioalves approved these changes

@MrMarteng MrMarteng Awaiting requested review from MrMarteng

@marekmatej marekmatej Awaiting requested review from marekmatej

@LucasTambor LucasTambor Awaiting requested review from LucasTambor

Assignees

@sylvioalves sylvioalves

Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
5 participants
@Trifunik @kartben @sylvioalves @nordicjm @fabiobaltieri