Skip to content

cpu/esp32: split ESP32 port into ESP32x common and ESP32 specific parts #17842

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Closed
wants to merge 63 commits into from
Closed

cpu/esp32: split ESP32 port into ESP32x common and ESP32 specific parts #17842

wants to merge 63 commits into from

Conversation

gschorcht
Copy link
Contributor

@gschorcht gschorcht commented Mar 22, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Contribution description

This PR splits the ESP32 port into a part that is common for all variants of the ESP32 SoC series and a part that is specific for the ESP32 SoC. It is required to handle different variants of the ESP32 SoC series.

This PR includes PR #17601 and #17841 to be compilable. Once these PRs are merged this PR is rebased. The first additional commit of this PR is ba6aa2e.

Testing procedure

Green CI with test run.

Issues/PRs references

Depends on PR #17601
Depends on PR #17841
Prerequisite for PR #17844

@gschorcht gschorcht changed the title cpu/esp32: split ESP32 port into ESP32x common and ESP32 specific cpu/esp32: split ESP32 port into ESP32x common and ESP32 specific parts Mar 22, 2022
@github-actions github-actions bot added Area: boards Area: Board ports Area: build system Area: Build system Area: cpu Area: CPU/MCU ports Area: doc Area: Documentation Area: drivers Area: Device drivers Area: Kconfig Area: Kconfig integration Area: pkg Area: External package ports Area: sys Area: System Area: tools Area: Supplementary tools Platform: ESP Platform: This PR/issue effects ESP-based platforms labels Mar 22, 2022
@gschorcht gschorcht mentioned this pull request Mar 22, 2022
Closed
@gschorcht gschorcht force-pushed the cpu/esp32/split_esp32_specific_and_common branch from 8b37a36 to 1c0656c Compare March 23, 2022 07:46
@gschorcht gschorcht added Type: enhancement The issue suggests enhanceable parts / The PR enhances parts of the codebase / documentation State: waiting for other PR State: The PR requires another PR to be merged first CI: run tests If set, CI server will run tests on hardware for the labeled PR and removed State: waiting for other PR State: The PR requires another PR to be merged first labels Mar 23, 2022
@gschorcht gschorcht force-pushed the cpu/esp32/split_esp32_specific_and_common branch 3 times, most recently from 9884846 to e9cfddd Compare April 6, 2022 13:46
@gschorcht gschorcht mentioned this pull request Apr 8, 2022
Closed
@gschorcht gschorcht force-pushed the cpu/esp32/split_esp32_specific_and_common branch from e9cfddd to 5271d68 Compare May 1, 2022 00:10
@gschorcht gschorcht requested a review from MrKevinWeiss as a code owner May 1, 2022 00:10
@gschorcht gschorcht mentioned this pull request May 3, 2022
Merged
@gschorcht gschorcht force-pushed the cpu/esp32/split_esp32_specific_and_common branch 2 times, most recently from 3c9d44a to 5512a48 Compare June 8, 2022 04:32
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the Area: CI Area: Continuous Integration of RIOT components label Jun 8, 2022
@maribu maribu added CI: ready for build If set, CI server will compile all applications for all available boards for the labeled PR and removed CI: ready for build If set, CI server will compile all applications for all available boards for the labeled PR labels Jun 8, 2022
@gschorcht
Copy link
Contributor Author

Does anyone have an idea why the status of the compilation of the PR in Murdock is shown as failed although no compilation error is shown and all compilations were successful according to the log?

@maribu
Copy link
Member

maribu commented Jun 8, 2022 •
edited
Loading

It says

The build only failed the label check.

so once the State: waiting for other PR is dropped it would pass.

@gschorcht
Copy link
Contributor Author

so once the State: waiting for other PR is dropped it would pass.

Ah ok, I didn't know that. So there is no reason to be worried and the compilation is fine.

@gschorcht gschorcht mentioned this pull request Jun 9, 2022
Closed
@gschorcht gschorcht mentioned this pull request Jun 20, 2022
Closed
This was referenced Jul 18, 2022
Merged
Merged
Merged
Merged
Merged
Merged
Merged
Merged
Merged
Merged
Merged
Merged
@gschorcht gschorcht mentioned this pull request Jul 26, 2022
Merged
@gschorcht
Copy link
Contributor Author

All split-offs are merged now.

@gschorcht gschorcht closed this Aug 9, 2022
@gschorcht gschorcht deleted the cpu/esp32/split_esp32_specific_and_common branch August 31, 2022 09:14
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@kaspar030 kaspar030 Awaiting requested review from kaspar030 kaspar030 is a code owner

@leandrolanzieri leandrolanzieri Awaiting requested review from leandrolanzieri leandrolanzieri is a code owner

@jia200x jia200x Awaiting requested review from jia200x jia200x is a code owner

@cgundogan cgundogan Awaiting requested review from cgundogan

@maribu maribu Awaiting requested review from maribu maribu is a code owner

@MrKevinWeiss MrKevinWeiss Awaiting requested review from MrKevinWeiss MrKevinWeiss is a code owner

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
Area: boards Area: Board ports Area: build system Area: Build system Area: cpu Area: CPU/MCU ports Area: doc Area: Documentation Area: drivers Area: Device drivers Area: Kconfig Area: Kconfig integration Area: pkg Area: External package ports Area: tools Area: Supplementary tools CI: ready for build If set, CI server will compile all applications for all available boards for the labeled PR Platform: ESP Platform: This PR/issue effects ESP-based platforms State: waiting for other PR State: The PR requires another PR to be merged first Type: enhancement The issue suggests enhanceable parts / The PR enhances parts of the codebase / documentation
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@gschorcht @maribu