nuttxpr commented on PR #14096: URL: https://github.com/apache/nuttx/pull/14096#issuecomment-2406717239
[**\[Experimental Bot, please feedback here\]**](https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Aapache%2Fnuttx+13552&type=issues) **No, this PR does not meet the NuttX requirements.** Here's why and how to improve it: * **Insufficient Summary:** * **Missing Why:** You need to explain the reason for adding timestamps. What problems does it solve? What use cases does it enable? * **Missing How:** Be specific about how timestamps are implemented. What data structure is used? Where is the timestamp information stored? How is it accessed? * **Incomplete Impact:** * **Potential Hardware Impact:** Adding timestamps might impact hardware timers or require driver modifications. Address this possibility. * **Documentation:** If this adds a new feature, documentation is crucial. Mention if documentation is included or needs to be added. * **Vague Testing:** * **Insufficient Detail:** Specify the exact board and configuration used. * **Missing Logs:** Provide relevant snippets of logs showing the timestamps working as expected. **Example of an Improved Summary:** "This PR adds support for CAN frame timestamps to provide more precise timing information for applications requiring accurate event sequencing or time-sensitive control. A new `struct can_msg_ts` structure is introduced that includes the standard `struct can_msg` fields along with a microsecond timestamp. The timestamp is captured by the CAN driver when a frame is received or transmitted. This change enables applications to analyze CAN bus traffic with higher temporal resolution." -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@nuttx.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
