core: msg: update detail section on IPC #4475
Conversation
|
Arch users be advices that there is a bug in the most current doxygen version regarding the fenced code block syntax: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=759177 |
| * To send a message synchronous to a thread one uses the function | ||
| * @ref msg_send_receive(). It sends a message and blocks the sending thread | ||
| * until a response is received. The receiving thread uses the function | ||
| * @ref msg_receive() to receive this message and must must reply to it with |
|
thx for taking the time to create examples! |
|
What example would I set if I would not give examples ;P
|
|
addressed comments |
| * | ||
| * Additionally, one can use @ref msg_send_receive() to simultaneously block | ||
| * the sending thread and expect a response response from the receiving thread. | ||
| * The receiving thread must use @ref msg_reply() to reply to the message of |
|
minor comments, but from my side, you can squash. |
|
Addressed comments and squashed immediately. |
|
Does this need to ACKs due to it [edit]technically[/edit] being a core change? |
|
nah. The two line code change doesn't chang anything semantically, so one ACK is OK. |
| * Non-blocking IPC | ||
| * ---------------- | ||
| * For the non-blocking variant use @ref msg_try_send() or | ||
| * @ref msg_try_receive() respectively. If a message is send in synchronous |
|
found two more typos... fix if you feel like... IMHO we should skip travis on this (all but the static tests that check the docs). |
| * respectively. | ||
| * | ||
| * Additionally, one can use @ref msg_send_receive() to simultaneously block | ||
| * the sending thread and expect a response response from the receiving thread. |
| * } | ||
| * ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ | ||
| * | ||
| * Time & messages |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How about "Timing & messages"?
|
Thanks Martine for taking the initiative! No need to discuss on my proposed changes, adapt what you take as reasonable. |
|
Addressed last batch of comments. |
| * mode or the message queue (see below) of the receiving thread is full | ||
| * messages sent this way will be dropped. | ||
| * | ||
| * You can use the example on asynchronous IPC below but without the queue for |
|
@authmillenon sorry being so picky, but now that you're on it ;-) ! IMO it's fine to squash |
|
Addressed comments and squashed |
|
ACK from my side. @kaspar030 please have a look and merge then!!! |
| @@ -148,7 +281,7 @@ int msg_send_int(msg_t *m, kernel_pid_t target_pid); | |||
| */ | |||
| static inline int msg_sent_by_int(const msg_t *m) | |||
| { | |||
| return (m->sender_pid == KERNEL_PID_ISR); | |||
| return m->sender_pid == KERNEL_PID_ISR; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why did you remove these parens?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's in the piggybacked uncrustify commit.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I guess we have to fix some settings there.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's one expression, so as far as I understand your parenthesis rules this should be right...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
(for e.g. two expressions the parenthesis would be kept around each)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"My" rule is basically always to have parens around any condition. Especially, I don't see any reason to remove them.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Changed and squashed immediately.
|
I'm confused. @PeterKietzmann did you ACK or do you want @kaspar030 to ACK? |
|
IMHO its fine. Go! |
core: msg: update detail section on IPC
|
Release version in #4496 |
Merges IPC section of old doxygen mainpage and detailed description and enhances it with some introductory text and examples.
Since I have uncrustify run as a pre-commit hook I included some style fixes too in an extra commit.