nuttxpr commented on PR #16199: URL: https://github.com/apache/nuttx/pull/16199#issuecomment-2801144751
[**\[Experimental Bot, please feedback here\]**](https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Aapache%2Fnuttx+13552&type=issues) Yes, this PR appears to meet the NuttX requirements, although some sections could be expanded for better clarity. **Strengths:** * **Clear problem description:** The summary clearly explains the difference between Linux SocketCAN and NuttX's current behavior regarding bitrate setting. * **Rationale for the change:** The rationale for mimicking Linux behavior is well-justified. * **Impact description:** The impact on users (requiring `ifdown`/`ifup` cycle) and drivers is stated. * **Testing mention:** Testing is mentioned, including the platform used. * **Cross-referencing:** Mention of a related PR in `apps/canutils/slcan` demonstrates consideration for the wider impact. **Areas for improvement:** * **Conciseness in Summary:** While the summary is clear, it could be slightly more concise by focusing directly on *what* the change does (preventing bitrate changes on an up interface) before explaining *why*. * **Missing details in Impact:** * The impact on the build process, hardware, documentation, security, and compatibility are all marked as "NO" without explanation. Even if there is truly no impact, explicitly stating "NO - No changes to the build process" adds clarity. This prevents reviewers from wondering if these aspects were simply overlooked. * **Insufficient Testing Information:** While testing is mentioned, it's lacking detail. The provided information doesn't show *how* the change was validated. The "testing logs before/after" sections are empty. Include specific commands used and the expected/observed output. For example: * **Before:** `ifconfig can0 up; ip link set can0 type can bitrate 500000` (expected: bitrate change succeeds) * **After:** `ifconfig can0 up; ip link set can0 type can bitrate 500000` (expected: operation fails with an error message) **Recommendation:** While the PR seems generally well-formed, adding the missing details in the Impact and Testing sections will significantly strengthen it and make the review process smoother. Provide concrete examples of commands used for testing and the expected outcomes, showcasing how the change functions and demonstrating its effectiveness. -- 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
