Skip to content

Release candidate for mbed-os-5.11.4 #9646

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

Merged
merged 152 commits into from
Feb 11, 2019
Merged

Release candidate for mbed-os-5.11.4 #9646

merged 152 commits into from
Feb 11, 2019

Conversation

adbridge
Copy link
Contributor

@adbridge adbridge commented Feb 8, 2019

No description provided.

@adbridge adbridge requested a review from a team February 8, 2019 12:51
@adbridge
Copy link
Contributor Author

adbridge commented Feb 8, 2019

CI started

@mbed-ci
Copy link

mbed-ci commented Feb 8, 2019

Test run: FAILED

Summary: 3 of 8 test jobs failed
Build number : 1
Build artifacts

Failed test jobs:

  • jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-ARM
  • jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-GCC_ARM
  • jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-IAR

@vmedcy
Copy link
Contributor

vmedcy commented Feb 8, 2019

@adbridge: apparently #9481 is not applied correctly in release-candidate branch: c424163 should be applied to targets/TARGET_Cypress/TARGET_PSOC6, not targets/TARGET_Cypress/TARGET_PSOC6_FUTURE, like here: 6d932c6. Also, cd98eb6 is missed (should follow immediately after 6b0658d).
The order of commits is important (due to TARGET_PSOC6 -> TARGET_PSOC6_FUTURE rename).

@adbridge
Copy link
Contributor Author

adbridge commented Feb 8, 2019

@vmedcy all the commits on the PR should be there, we just use git am -3 to take all the commits from the original PR and merge them across. If that has not worked correctly then it looks like an issue with the original PR :(

@adbridge
Copy link
Contributor Author

adbridge commented Feb 8, 2019

I'll try reverting the PR and then try cherry picking each individual commit from #4981 in the order they are on the PR

@adbridge
Copy link
Contributor Author

adbridge commented Feb 8, 2019

@vmedcy OK there is something seriously wrong with the commits on #9481 . This is the commit list in the order they were put on the PR
cd98eb6
6b0658d
4713de2
6d932c6
432c29d
769b725
7aeb2ff
5c47eb4
a304c22
a168115
022bd8e
aebf242

When I try to cherry pick the first commit across , it gives an empty commit! If I allow that and move on, the next 2 come across ok and then 6d932c6 fails. Currently I don't see how this can come across as it stands...

@vmedcy
Copy link
Contributor

vmedcy commented Feb 8, 2019

@abridge: the correct order is:
6b0658d
cd98eb6
4713de2
6d932c6
432c29d
769b725
7aeb2ff
5c47eb4
a304c22
a168115
022bd8e
aebf242

This is the order the commits appear in the git log as well as github web interface:
https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbed-os/commits/master

How do you get the commit order mentioned in the post? It is wrong.

@adbridge
Copy link
Contributor Author

adbridge commented Feb 8, 2019

https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbed-os/pull/9481/commits
I would normally expect that to be in the right order

Let me try cherry-picking in the order you have specified

lrusinowicz and others added 22 commits February 8, 2019 16:50
Compilation error was due to due to bug in gcc.py
Add "-mfpu=none" compilation flag
$(file > [email protected], $(filter %.o, $^)) is not supported in GNU Make 3.81.
Create the linker response file with pipe redirect from echo command.
This is tested with Cygwin make and make 3.8.1 shipped with macOS.

Also, change the linker responce file name to .link_options.txt.
This is an internal file, not a build artifact.
If config is specified, check that part size is not
exceeding the region. Normally we now assume that
part.maxaddr() can be beyond end of rom.
The targets/TARGET_Cypress/TARGET_PSOC6 is dedicated to the mbed-os HAL
and PSoC 6 MCU targets developed by Cypress Semiconductor. Move the
existing port developed by Future Electronics to TARGET_PSOC_FUTURE
and update the labels in targets.json appropriately.
Copy the porting layer from TARGET_PSOC6_FUTURE to TARGET_PSOC6.
This commit is intended to make the history and changes applied easier
to follow.
ipcpipe_transport.c, ipcpipe_transport.h, rpc_api.h, rpc_defs.h
are excluded (not used by Cypress port).
PeripheralNames.h is moved to BSP layer introduced in subsequent
commits (the peripheral names and count are board-specific).
Integrate the latest fixes to the PSoC 6 HAL.
Exclude the labels from inherited FUTURE_SEQUANA targets.
Code generated for pioneer kits:
* CY8CKIT-062-4343W
* CY8CKIT-062-BLE
* CY8CKIT-WIFI-BT
Prototyping boards:
* CY8CPROTO-062-4343W

The source is generated with ModusToolbox Device Configurator.
The origin design.modus files used to produce the GeneratedSource
will be submitted in the consequent pull requests.
TARGET_CYW4343X Bluetooth HCI driver is specific to STM32 targets
derived from USI_WM_BN_BM_22. Move the driver implementation to
TARGET_STM folder to not interfere with Cypress implementation at
TARGET_Cypress/TARGET_CYW43XXX/HCIDriver.cpp that is enabled for
PSoC 6 targets which also include the CYW4343X label.
Add Cypress HCI driver implementation in TARGET_Cypress directory.

Update targets.json to enable CORDIO stack for Cypress PSoC 6 boards
with CYW43XXX radios with compatible HCI driver implementation:
CYW4343W and CYW43012.
Add prebuilt WICED libraries for the PSoC 6 boards with WICED radios:
* TARGET_CY8CKIT_062_4343W
* TARGET_CY8CKIT_062_WIFI_BT
* TARGET_CY8CPROTO_062_4343W
* TARGET_CYW943012P6EVB_01

Add required extra labels to the PSoC 6 targets in targets.json:
(PSOC6_01/02 labels are used during the library compilation).
Set the default network interface type as WIFI for Cypress
targets with on-board WICED Wi-Fi module.
@adbridge
Copy link
Contributor Author

adbridge commented Feb 8, 2019

@vmedcy thanks for that commit order, they have all come across cleanly now, so fingers crossed we should get a pass this time !

@mbed-ci
Copy link

mbed-ci commented Feb 8, 2019

Test run: SUCCESS

Summary: 12 of 12 test jobs passed
Build number : 2
Build artifacts

@0xc0170 0xc0170 merged commit ecb3c8c into mbed-os-5.11 Feb 11, 2019
@vmedcy
Copy link
Contributor

vmedcy commented Feb 12, 2019

Hi @adbridge:

https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbed-os/pull/9481/commits
I would normally expect that to be in the right order

Let me try cherry-picking in the order you have specified

I figured out why the commit order on github page https://github.com/ARMmbed/mbed-os/pull/9481/commits is wrong.
Each git commit has author date and commit date. Author date is preserved during rebase/amend, unlike commit date which is always updated dynamically by git.
GitHub displays the author date in the web UI, but sorts the commits by the commit date.
Commit dates of both cd98eb6 and 6b0658d are identical: 2019-02-06 18:56:19, because the second commit was applied non-interactively during the rebase operation.

Learning: do not rely on the commit order in the GitHub web interface :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.