cpu/esp: Use CPU_ESP8266 define instead of the removed MCU_ESP8266 #20416
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Follow-up-for: RIOT-OS#20397 Closes: RIOT-OS#20409 Closes: RIOT-OS#20415
benpicco
approved these changes
Feb 22, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Contribution description
Some vendor files we have in the ESP CPU area were modified to pick up our defines, in particular MCU_ESP8266. Our MCU went away in #20397, this fixes things by doing a change in the style of what was already done there for the ESP CPUs. (My original checks left those out because those were vendor files, and most other vendors have all kinds of MCU_SOMETHING_INTERNAL defines that are unrelated to our MCU defines).
Testing procedure
Issues/PRs references
Follow-up-for: #20397 (where I broke this)
Closes: #20409 (which inspired this)
Closes: #20415 (which would also solve the issue but also keep the MCU_ variable mess)
Acknowledgements
Thanks @maribu for finding in #20498 the precise cause, I'm just offering a different solution.