nuttxpr commented on PR #15907: URL: https://github.com/apache/nuttx/pull/15907#issuecomment-2681873076
[**\[Experimental Bot, please feedback here\]**](https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Aapache%2Fnuttx+13552&type=issues) Yes, this PR appears to meet the basic NuttX requirements, but it's incomplete. Here's a breakdown: **Strengths:** * **Clear Summary:** The summary adequately describes the *what* and *why* of the change. The *how* could be slightly more explicit, perhaps mentioning the specific implementation details (e.g., register manipulation, interrupt handling). * **Impact Description:** The impact section identifies the affected area (debugpoint functionality) and notes a planned future improvement for the interrupt handler. * **Testing Instructions:** It provides basic testing instructions, including necessary configuration options. **Weaknesses:** * **Missing Links:** The summary mentions a future PR for improving the interrupt handler but doesn't provide a link or issue number. * **Incomplete Testing:** The "Testing logs before change" and "Testing logs after change" sections are empty. This is critical and must be filled in with actual logs demonstrating the change's functionality and verifying it works as expected. * **Lack of Detail in Impact:** While the impact section mentions changes to the user experience (ability to use the `debugpoint` program) and build process (config options), it lacks specifics. For instance, it doesn't mention which Xtensa architectures or boards were tested. The impact on documentation is also unclear — will documentation need to be updated to reflect this new functionality? * **Missing Build/Host Information:** The testing section lacks details about the build host and target used for verification. Provide the requested OS, CPU, compiler, Xtensa architecture, board, and configuration. * **Security/Compatibility Impacts:** The PR mentions no considerations for security or compatibility, which should be addressed, even if the impact is "NO". Explicitly stating "NO" with a brief justification (e.g., "NO - This change only affects debugging functionality and doesn't introduce new security risks.") is better than leaving it blank. **Conclusion:** While the PR presents a good starting point, it needs further work to fully meet the NuttX requirements. Specifically, it needs to include actual testing logs, complete information about the testing environment, and address the missing details in the Impact section. Adding the missing link to the planned interrupt handler PR would also be beneficial. -- 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
