-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.1k
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
Fix issues in 27575 #32772
Fix issues in 27575 #32772
Conversation
…_r1240951613 Do not see a way to avoid reloading project-chip#26082 (comment)
…2621779 Co-authored-by: Boris Zbarsky <[email protected]>
…/files#r1242627777 - added new delegate functions to nofify important changes - free readclient memory once operation is complete - don't immediately emit time failure event when trusted time source is set
…242655854 - https://github.com/project-chip/connectedhomeip/pull/26082/files#r1242660231 - https://github.com/project-chip/connectedhomeip/pull/26082/files#r1242658973 - https://github.com/project-chip/connectedhomeip/pull/26082/files#r1242657708 - https://github.com/project-chip/connectedhomeip/pull/26082/files#r1242667611 - https://github.com/project-chip/connectedhomeip/pull/26082/files#r1242673209 - https://github.com/project-chip/connectedhomeip/pull/26082/files#r1242683543
…rrent ToT and is fixed here
PR #32772: Size comparison from 036e7bf to 4b25a04 Full report (3 builds for cc32xx, stm32)
|
4b25a04
to
cb49534
Compare
- fix format on logging
PR #32772: Size comparison from 036e7bf to 987b7a7 Increases (5 builds for cyw30739, esp32, telink)
Decreases (4 builds for efr32, esp32, psoc6)
Full report (55 builds for bl602, bl702, bl702l, cc13x4_26x4, cc32xx, cyw30739, efr32, esp32, k32w, mbed, psoc6, qpg, stm32, telink)
|
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 seems like it should have been multiple sane-sized reviewable PRs, not a single giant blob....
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 could break this in to 2 or 3 PRs but more would be too much for me to maintain.
Would you prefer I do that @bzbarsky-apple ?
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 that because the dozens of issues listed in #27575 involve touching the same bits of code? Or something else?
Ideally, we would have one PR per issue or close to it. Right now trying to review this and make sure it actually fixes the list of issues it's claiming is something like O(N*M) where N is size of PR and M is number of issues it claims to fix....
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.
To be exact, these are not issues. They are all comments (may be for 1 or 2 exceptions) that are tracked in 1 issue.
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 know they are tracked in one github issue. But they are independent bits that need to be fixed, and comparing the PR to that list is very painful.
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 tried to break down the PR but at this point it needs too much work to align the changes without causing build errors.
Therefore, I will list down all the changes in this PR in the description. I hope that works for you.
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.
The big problem is comparing the list in the description to the list of things this is supposed to be fixing and comparing one list or the other to the code....
That is, how do I check within sane time that this PR in fact fixes the things it claims to be fixing?
- reading DSToffset keeps the list updated, therefore only remaining valid entry is returned on reading it
Description of issues fixed from #27575 :
Addition of delegate functions for better usability: