Receive path cleanup for PacketBufferHandle conversion

[kpschoedel]

Problem

Code should use PacketBufferHandle rather than PacketBuffer *.

Summary of Changes

Simplify by using Create factory instead of declare-adopt-move.

Part of issue #2707 - Figure out a way to express PacketBuffer ownership in the type system

[github-actions]

Size increase report for "nrfconnect-example-build" from 548b71a

File	Section	File	VM
chip-shell.elf	log_const_sections	4	4
chip-shell.elf	text	-4	-4
chip-lock.elf	shell_root_cmds_sections	4	4
chip-lock.elf	text	-4	-4
chip-lighting.elf	text	-4	-4
chip-lighting.elf	shell_root_cmds_sections	-12	-12

Full report output

BLOAT REPORT

Files found only in the build output:
    report.csv

Comparing ./master_artifact/chip-shell.elf and ./pull_artifact/chip-shell.elf:

sections,vmsize,filesize
.debug_loc,0,64
.debug_ranges,0,8
log_const_sections,4,4
text,-4,-4
.debug_aranges,0,-8
.debug_str,0,-12
.debug_frame,0,-28
.debug_line,0,-46
.debug_info,0,-82

Comparing ./master_artifact/chip-lock.elf and ./pull_artifact/chip-lock.elf:

sections,vmsize,filesize
.debug_loc,0,64
.debug_ranges,0,8
shell_root_cmds_sections,4,4
text,-4,-4
.debug_aranges,0,-8
.debug_str,0,-12
.debug_frame,0,-28
.debug_line,0,-46
.debug_info,0,-82

Comparing ./master_artifact/chip-lighting.elf and ./pull_artifact/chip-lighting.elf:

sections,vmsize,filesize
.debug_loc,0,68
.debug_ranges,0,8
text,-4,-4
.debug_aranges,0,-8
.debug_str,0,-12
shell_root_cmds_sections,-12,-12
.debug_frame,0,-28
.debug_line,0,-42
.debug_info,0,-82

[github-actions]

Size increase report for "esp32-example-build" from 548b71a

File	Section	File	VM
chip-all-clusters-app.elf	.flash.text	-16	-16

Full report output

BLOAT REPORT

Files found only in the build output:
    report.csv

Comparing ./master_artifact/chip-all-clusters-app.elf and ./pull_artifact/chip-all-clusters-app.elf:

sections,vmsize,filesize
.debug_loc,0,58
.xt.prop._ZTVN4chip11DeviceLayer37DeviceNetworkProvisioningDelegateImplE,0,2
.debug_aranges,0,-8
.debug_str,0,-12
.debug_ranges,0,-16
.flash.text,-16,-16
.debug_frame,0,-24
.debug_abbrev,0,-25
.debug_info,0,-305
.debug_line,0,-382

[bzbarsky-apple]

Looking at the uses here, I wonder whether Create should be named Import or something... Or whether once we are done we will have no real public uses of Adopt and can just make it private and maybe name the current Create API Adopt?

[kpschoedel]

Looking at the uses here, I wonder whether Create should be named Import or something... Or whether once we are done we will have no real public uses of Adopt and can just make it private and maybe name the current Create API Adopt?

Yes, I do want to make the current Adopt() private, if not refactor it away entirely — I've already been bitten by its ref-count asymmetry (i.e. it Frees the old buffer, does not AddRef the new one).