Skip to content

gnrc_netif: replace GNRC_NETIF_SINGLE with gnrc_netif_single pseudo-module#14632

Merged
miri64 merged 1 commit intoRIOT-OS:masterfrom
benpicco:netif_single
Jul 28, 2020
Merged

gnrc_netif: replace GNRC_NETIF_SINGLE with gnrc_netif_single pseudo-module#14632
miri64 merged 1 commit intoRIOT-OS:masterfrom
benpicco:netif_single

Conversation

@benpicco
Copy link
Contributor

@benpicco benpicco commented Jul 28, 2020 •
edited
Loading

Contribution description

To being able to use this information during dependency resolution, make gnrc_netif_single a pseudo-module.

Testing procedure

File size of the affected examples should not change.

Issues/PRs references

#13746 (comment)

@benpicco benpicco added Type: enhancement The issue suggests enhanceable parts / The PR enhances parts of the codebase / documentation Area: network Area: Networking labels Jul 28, 2020
benpicco
benpicco commented Jul 28, 2020
View reviewed changes
miri64
miri64 requested changes Jul 28, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@miri64 miri64 left a comment •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

NACK. This moves a GNRC-specific optimization to netif without providing any support for that in other network stacks and also is based on a misunderstanding in #13746 (comment)

@miri64
Copy link
Member

miri64 commented Jul 28, 2020

Alternatively you could move this to a pseudo-module to gnrc_netif_single, but that won't help you with the issue I pointed out in #13746.

@miri64
Copy link
Member

miri64 commented Jul 28, 2020

[…] but that won't help you with the issue I pointed out in #13746.

Ok, it could, since it makes it more obvious to the build system... ^^

miri64
miri64 reviewed Jul 28, 2020
View reviewed changes
@benpicco benpicco changed the title gnrc_netif: replace GNRC_NETIF_SINGLE with netif_single pseudo-module gnrc_netif: replace GNRC_NETIF_SINGLE with gnrc_netif_single pseudo-module Jul 28, 2020
@benpicco
Copy link
Contributor Author

benpicco commented Jul 28, 2020

Ok, I re-wrote the PR to use gnrc_netif_single instead.

@leandrolanzieri leandrolanzieri requested a review from jia200x July 28, 2020 11:15
miri64
miri64 previously requested changes Jul 28, 2020
View reviewed changes
@miri64
Copy link
Member

miri64 commented Jul 28, 2020

I'm fine with the current state, however the makefiles should not desolve into chaos ;-)

miri64
miri64 reviewed Jul 28, 2020
View reviewed changes
@miri64 miri64 added Reviewed: 1-fundamentals The fundamentals of the PR were reviewed according to the maintainer guidelines Reviewed: 2-code-design The code design of the PR was reviewed according to the maintainer guidelines Reviewed: 4-code-style The adherence to coding conventions by the PR were reviewed according to the maintainer guidelines Reviewed: 5-documentation The documentation details of the PR were reviewed according to the maintainer guidelines labels Jul 28, 2020
@miri64 miri64 dismissed their stale review July 28, 2020 11:38

I'm fine with the current state, but I still need to test this.

@miri64
Copy link
Member

miri64 commented Jul 28, 2020 •
edited
Loading

Tested so far

  • examples/emcute_mqttsn
  • examples/gnrc_minimal
  • tests/emcute
  • tests/gnrc_sock_dns
  • tests/gnrc_tcp

@miri64
Copy link
Member

miri64 commented Jul 28, 2020

tests/emcute fails, but in the same way it fails in master. IIRC it worked for the release tests, so need to investigate that 👀

@miri64 miri64 added the Reviewed: 3-testing The PR was tested according to the maintainer guidelines label Jul 28, 2020
miri64
miri64 approved these changes Jul 28, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@miri64 miri64 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ACK. Please squash

@benpicco benpicco added the CI: ready for build If set, CI server will compile all applications for all available boards for the labeled PR label Jul 28, 2020
@miri64
Copy link
Member

miri64 commented Jul 28, 2020

tests/emcute fails, but in the same way it fails in master. IIRC it worked for the release tests, so need to investigate that 👀

Something in a274ea4 (#12428) broke that test according to my bisect :-/

@miri64
Copy link
Member

miri64 commented Jul 28, 2020 •
edited
Loading

Something in a274ea4 (#12428) broke that test according to my bisect :-/

as the failure happens on the large payload topic name test, I suspect something going wrong there.

@miri64
Copy link
Member

miri64 commented Jul 28, 2020

as the failure happens on the large payload topic name test, I suspect something going wrong there.

No, if I remove the previous two test cases the test case succeeds, but then the last one fails, so its always on the third test case :-/

@miri64
Copy link
Member

miri64 commented Jul 28, 2020

See #14636

@miri64 miri64 merged commit 0e3aa2f into RIOT-OS:master Jul 28, 2020
@benpicco benpicco deleted the netif_single branch July 28, 2020 16:00
@miri64 miri64 mentioned this pull request Jul 28, 2020
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@miri64 miri64 miri64 approved these changes

@aabadie aabadie Awaiting requested review from aabadie aabadie is a code owner

@fjmolinas fjmolinas Awaiting requested review from fjmolinas

@leandrolanzieri leandrolanzieri Awaiting requested review from leandrolanzieri leandrolanzieri is a code owner

@MichelRottleuthner MichelRottleuthner Awaiting requested review from MichelRottleuthner MichelRottleuthner is a code owner

@smlng smlng Awaiting requested review from smlng

@jia200x jia200x Awaiting requested review from jia200x

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

Area: network Area: Networking CI: ready for build If set, CI server will compile all applications for all available boards for the labeled PR Reviewed: 1-fundamentals The fundamentals of the PR were reviewed according to the maintainer guidelines Reviewed: 2-code-design The code design of the PR was reviewed according to the maintainer guidelines Reviewed: 3-testing The PR was tested according to the maintainer guidelines Reviewed: 4-code-style The adherence to coding conventions by the PR were reviewed according to the maintainer guidelines Reviewed: 5-documentation The documentation details of the PR were reviewed according to the maintainer guidelines Type: enhancement The issue suggests enhanceable parts / The PR enhances parts of the codebase / documentation

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@benpicco @miri64