TemperatureSensors.c

Clone Tools
  • last updated a few minutes ago
Constraints
Constraints: committers
 
Constraints: files
Constraints: dates
DEN-12931 updated the drivers with doxygen comments

  1. … 2 more files in changeset.
Merge branch 'DEN-12931-dg_hd_dev-hd_dg_dvt-update' into develop

  1. … 1 more file in changeset.
DEN-12931 updated the temperature sensors driver

  1. … 1 more file in changeset.
Merge branch 'DEN-12931-dg_hd_dev-hd_dg_dvt-update' into develop

  1. … 2 more files in changeset.
DEN-12931 updated the dialysate flow sensor K factor

  1. … 3 more files in changeset.
Merged DEN-12931

  1. … 11 more files in changeset.
DEN-12931 updated the drivers for DVT

  1. … 2 more files in changeset.
DEN-12931 updated the drivers with the DVT changes. Added code to run RTC and NVDataMgmt POSTs at fault mode

  1. … 8 more files in changeset.
DEN-12931 updated the code

  1. … 6 more files in changeset.
DG-DEN-12931_DG HD Dev HD DG Dvt Update
DG-DEN-12931_DG HD Dev HD DG Dvt Update
DEN-12931 updated the drviers with DVT changes

  1. … 17 more files in changeset.
Fixed temperatureSensors driver with the newest faults

That would also require a change to the requirements.

That would also require a change to the requirements.

Seems like isADCValid should be returned.

Seems like isADCValid should be returned.

This will be addressed in DEN-12931.

This will be addressed in DEN-12931.

This will be addressed in DEN-12931.

This will be addressed in DEN-12931.

This will be addressed in DEN-12931.

This will be addressed in DEN-12931.

This will be addressed in DEN-12931.

This will be addressed in DEN-12931.

This will be addressed in DEN-12931.

This will be addressed in DEN-12931.

This will be addressed in DEN-12931.

This will be addressed in DEN-12931.

Removed blank line

Removed blank line

Will add back in.

Will add back in.

Should we return isADCValid? Pick one, remove the other.

Should we return isADCValid? Pick one, remove the other.

Can we remove this code now?

Can we remove this code now?

Why is this commented out?

Why is this commented out?

Can we just remove this code now?

Can we just remove this code now?

Does this function activate alarm too? Why needed if line above activates alarm already? Why commented out?

Does this function activate alarm too? Why needed if line above activates alarm already? Why commented out?

Why is this alarm commented out?

Why is this alarm commented out?

I think we need two separate minimums here. 1. used by ROPump.c should be 0.2 and private (declared in ROPump.c) with this name. 2. used by UVReactors.c should be 0.3 and private (declared in UVRea...

I think we need two separate minimums here.
1. used by ROPump.c should be 0.2 and private (declared in ROPump.c) with this name.
2. used by UVReactors.c should be 0.3 and private (declared in UVReactors.c) with a different name like MIN_RO_FLOW_FOR_UV_LPM.

Remove extra blank line.

Remove extra blank line.