Hi Tim,
AFAIK NuttX doesn't have a standard way to do it.
It is normally done at board level (do a "git grep backlight" inside
boards/ to see some examples).
A proper way to do that should be implementing a backlight subsystem, like
a subset of Linux backlight subsystem:
https://docs.kernel.org/g
My SAMA5 board has an LCD with variable brightness (pwm controlled).
arch/arm/src/chip/sam_lcd.c has a function called "sam_backlight) that
takes a level value, but it appears to be local to that file, and the
only call to it is in the LCD init functions in that file, complete with
a comment t
Just to be clear, I am always referring to the standard C assert()
function/macro.
Not the unconditional NuttX ASSERT() macro. Notice the capitalization!
(Which is another confusing point worth improving... +1 for NX_ASSERT() )
On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 7:32 PM Fotis Panagiotopoulos
wrote:
> I am
I am sorry, but I still don't see the difference.
See this line here:
https://github.com/apache/nuttx/blob/master/include/assert.h#L119
When NDEBUG is defined, assert also compiles to nothing.
As it ought to do.
(NDEBUG definition is also controlled by Kconfig, with CONFIG_NDEBUG)
So, is there
+1 :-)
--
CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info
On Wed, Jan 3, 2024, 17:44 Gregory Nutt wrote:
> +1
>
> On 1/3/2024 10:43 AM, Nathan Hartman wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 11:22 AM Gregory Nutt
> wrote:
> >> On 1/3/2024 10:11 AM, Fotis Panagiotopoulos wrote:
> That would seem a
+1
On 1/3/2024 10:43 AM, Nathan Hartman wrote:
On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 11:22 AM Gregory Nutt wrote:
On 1/3/2024 10:11 AM, Fotis Panagiotopoulos wrote:
That would seem a little odd since there was a PR a few years ago to
change all instances of assert/ASSERT to DEBUGASSERT to save code size.
On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 11:22 AM Gregory Nutt wrote:
>
> On 1/3/2024 10:11 AM, Fotis Panagiotopoulos wrote:
> >> That would seem a little odd since there was a PR a few years ago to
> > change all instances of assert/ASSERT to DEBUGASSERT to save code size.
> >
> > How is that so?
> >
> > As I see
On 1/3/2024 10:11 AM, Fotis Panagiotopoulos wrote:
That would seem a little odd since there was a PR a few years ago to
change all instances of assert/ASSERT to DEBUGASSERT to save code size.
How is that so?
As I see here:
https://github.com/apache/nuttx/blob/master/include/assert.h#L122
asser
> That would seem a little odd since there was a PR a few years ago to
change all instances of assert/ASSERT to DEBUGASSERT to save code size.
How is that so?
As I see here:
https://github.com/apache/nuttx/blob/master/include/assert.h#L122
assert defined exactly as DEBUGASSERT.
There shouldn't b
On 1/3/2024 5:12 AM, Fotis Panagiotopoulos wrote:
Hello everyone,
I am glad that we all agree on this matter.
We can handle this in the following steps:
1. Ensure that any new PRs and apps follow this convention.
This is up to the reviewers, to enforce.
2. Get rid of all DEBUGASSERTs in apps.
Hello everyone,
I am glad that we all agree on this matter.
We can handle this in the following steps:
1. Ensure that any new PRs and apps follow this convention.
This is up to the reviewers, to enforce.
2. Get rid of all DEBUGASSERTs in apps.
Unfortunately, a quick grep yielded 3410 results...
11 matches
Mail list logo
