Skip to content

boards/nrf52: cleanup shared Makefile.deps#12114

Closed
haukepetersen wants to merge 4 commits intoRIOT-OS:masterfrom
haukepetersen:fix_boards_nrf52deps
Closed

boards/nrf52: cleanup shared Makefile.deps#12114
haukepetersen wants to merge 4 commits intoRIOT-OS:masterfrom
haukepetersen:fix_boards_nrf52deps

Conversation

@haukepetersen
Copy link
Contributor

Contribution description

The nrf52832 and the nrf52840-based platforms have different default radio modes (nimble_netif and nrf802154, respectively). But the according Makefile.deps were a little messy, so this PR should improve on this...

Testing procedure

For gnrc_networking, verify that all nrf52840 boards are now being build with the 802.15.4 support (nrf802154) and all nrf52832 baords with IP-over-BLE support (nimble_netif). Also, all boards should flawlessly build with nrfmin.

Issues/PRs references

none

@haukepetersen haukepetersen added Type: cleanup The issue proposes a clean-up / The PR cleans-up parts of the codebase / documentation CI: ready for build If set, CI server will compile all applications for all available boards for the labeled PR Area: boards Area: Board ports labels Aug 29, 2019
@haukepetersen
Copy link
Contributor Author

Just in case someone is wondering: for some reason, some of the effected boards were per default using the nrfmin driver. Although this is/was helpful for including this driver in the build tests, it is quite strange to have some boards using this driver, and some others with the same CPU using another radio mode... I opened an issue for including the nrfmin driver again in the build tests (#12115), so we don't forget about this.

@aabadie
Copy link
Contributor

aabadie commented Aug 29, 2019

Could this be considered as a duplicate of #11792 ? (I haven't look into the details).

@haukepetersen
Copy link
Contributor Author

Just noticed: this PR also fixes all nrf52840 boards, as currently we are not able to build nimble_netif for these due to a collision with the nrf802154 module...

@haukepetersen
Copy link
Contributor Author

yes, it actually is kind of (did not see it...). Although #11792 has still some dependency loop and it is not up-to-date with the ble stuff we merged yesterday.

I don't care how we proceed, do you want to adapt #11792 and I simply close this PR? Or the other way around?

@kaspar030 kaspar030 added CI: ready for build If set, CI server will compile all applications for all available boards for the labeled PR and removed CI: ready for build If set, CI server will compile all applications for all available boards for the labeled PR labels Aug 29, 2019
@haukepetersen
Copy link
Contributor Author

closing in favor of #11792

@miri64 miri64 added the State: duplicate State: The issue/PR is a duplicate of another issue/PR label Aug 29, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Area: boards Area: Board ports CI: ready for build If set, CI server will compile all applications for all available boards for the labeled PR State: duplicate State: The issue/PR is a duplicate of another issue/PR Type: cleanup The issue proposes a clean-up / The PR cleans-up parts of the codebase / documentation

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants