nuttxpr commented on PR #14538:
URL: https://github.com/apache/nuttx/pull/14538#issuecomment-2443444655

   [**\[Experimental Bot, please feedback 
here\]**](https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Aapache%2Fnuttx+13552&type=issues)
   
   
   
   The PR summary is well-structured and informative, but it lacks a clear 
explanation of *why* these changes are necessary. 
   
   Here's a breakdown of what's missing and how to improve it:
   
   **Summary:**
   
   * **Missing "Why":** 
       * **cmake/gcov:** Why is it important to keep cmake consistent with the 
makefile in this context?  Is there a problem with the current inconsistency? 
What benefits does consistency bring?
       * **gcov:** Why is it necessary to move gcov out of the sched directory? 
Why is it important for gcov to be a separate functional module?
   
   **Impact:**
   
   * **This section is entirely missing.** You need to address each impact 
point specifically. Even if there is no impact, explicitly stating "NO" is 
important for clarity. 
   
   **Testing:**
   
   * **Insufficient Information:** 
       * Provide the actual OS, CPU, compiler, architecture, board, and 
configuration details used for testing. 
       * The testing logs sections are empty. Include relevant snippets 
demonstrating the issue before the change and the improvement after the change.
   
   **Example Improvements:**
   
   **Summary:**
   
   1. **cmake/gcov:**  Currently, the cmake build system handles gcov 
differently than the makefile system, leading to potential inconsistencies and 
build issues. This change aligns the cmake configuration with the makefile to 
ensure consistent behavior and avoid unexpected problems when building with 
gcov enabled.
   2. **gcov:** The placement of gcov within the sched directory is illogical, 
as gcov is a code coverage tool unrelated to scheduling. This change relocates 
gcov to its own dedicated module, similar to gdbstub, for improved code 
organization, maintainability, and clarity. This separation also allows for 
more fine-grained control over gcov dependencies.
   
   **Impact:**
   
   * **Is new feature added?** NO
   * **Is existing feature changed?** YES (gcov configuration and build process)
   * **Impact on user:** YES (Users will need to adjust their build 
configurations to enable gcov correctly due to the dependency changes).
   * **Impact on build:** YES (The cmake build files are modified to handle 
gcov consistently with the makefile. The location of gcov source files and 
dependencies will change).
   * **Impact on hardware:** NO
   * **Impact on documentation:** YES (Documentation needs to be updated to 
reflect the new location of gcov and the modified configuration options).
   * **Impact on security:**  NO
   * **Impact on compatibility:** NO (Backward compatibility is maintained)
   * **Anything else to consider:** NO
   
   **Testing:**
   
   * **Build Host(s):** 
       * OS: Ubuntu 20.04
       * CPU: Intel Core i7-10700K
       * Compiler: GCC 10.2.1
   * **Target(s):**
       * Arch: ARM (simulated with QEMU)
       * Board: STM32F4 Discovery
       * Config:  `configs/stm32f4discovery/nsh`
   
   **Testing logs before change:** 
   ```
   (Show error messages or unexpected behavior related to gcov) 
   ```
   
   **Testing logs after change:**
   ```
   (Show successful gcov instrumentation and report generation)
   ```
   
   By providing specific details and addressing all the required points, you 
make it much easier for reviewers to understand and evaluate your PR. 
   


-- 
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: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to