dd-firmware

Clone Tools
  • last updated a few minutes ago
Constraints
Constraints: committers
 
Constraints: files
Constraints: dates
I think cal data and count should be retrieved by same function and possibly needs some interrupt protection to ensure data and count stick together. If these functions are called from general task...

I think cal data and count should be retrieved by same function and possibly needs some interrupt protection to ensure data and count stick together. If these functions are called from general task, we could have situation where data is retrieved, then priority task updates fpga, and then counter is retrieved with wrong (incremented) counter.
If these two functions are being called from a driver that is executed in priority task, then we don't need to worry about this situation, but still ought to add a constraint/warning comment in function headers noting that these functions should only be called from priority task.

Remove extra blank line.

Remove extra blank line.

It is your comment, so please resolve it.

It is your comment, so please resolve it.

I think Dialin will need get (or UI proxy) commands to have us send cal, s/n, and versions.

I think Dialin will need get (or UI proxy) commands to have us send cal, s/n, and versions.

Do FP sensors have to be treated separately? I realize there needs to be separate messages as they will be coming from different Dialin classes, but can't we handle both messages with same function...

Do FP sensors have to be treated separately? I realize there needs to be separate messages as they will be coming from different Dialin classes, but can't we handle both messages with same function (assuming shared enum to index)?

General Dialin question - does it make sense to override temperatures at driver level where they are spread out over several drivers? I would think overriding at monitor level would be simpler wher...

General Dialin question - does it make sense to override temperatures at driver level where they are spread out over several drivers? I would think overriding at monitor level would be simpler where they are all in one place and could be indexed by enum with single command.

Do we need to say Value?

Do we need to say Value?

Add a blank line after public defs banner. Add a dox comment to the right. I believe they reserve space for 12 bytes, not 10. Not really for calibration - it's for s/n and versions.

Add a blank line after public defs banner.
Add a dox comment to the right.
I believe they reserve space for 12 bytes, not 10.
Not really for calibration - it's for s/n and versions.

Are these really going to be different types? I assumed they would all be floats.

Are these really going to be different types? I assumed they would all be floats.

Structures need a top level dox comment.

Structures need a top level dox comment.

enums need a top level dox comment.

enums need a top level dox comment.

This function also not using u32ArrayOverride()

This function also not using u32ArrayOverride()

is it possible to use the function u32ArrayOverride() here ?

is it possible to use the function u32ArrayOverride() here ?

I believe conductivity and temperature data will be F32s.

I believe conductivity and temperature data will be F32s.

Do we not need this anymore? I still see it in code all over the place and I don't think we're done w/ Teensy until Beta 1.9 units are obsolete.

Do we not need this anymore? I still see it in code all over the place and I don't think we're done w/ Teensy until Beta 1.9 units are obsolete.

Are we sure about the reversing of states here? If we had this backward, I would think the Systems team would have had a much bigger complaint. The description of their issue suggests that the 8 BC...

Are we sure about the reversing of states here? If we had this backward, I would think the Systems team would have had a much bigger complaint.
The description of their issue suggests that the 8 BC valves were correctly commanded to requested state except for the one they separately commanded earlier.
If we had this backward, I would think they would have said that all 8 valves did the wrong thing.

I don't think mask or pos require initialization either.

I don't think mask or pos require initialization either.

I don't think valve needs to be initialized here. The for loop initializes it.

I don't think valve needs to be initialized here. The for loop initializes it.

Bamboo Commit: Updated DDCommon.h with build versions from Bamboo.

Merged LDT-2030 and resolved the conflicts

    • -17
    • +19
    /firmware/App/Modes/ModeGenDialysate.c
LDT-2030-added a function which enqueues emb mode broadcast

Merge branch 'staging' into LDT-2030-blood-leak-refactor---dd

It is replied by Vinay , there is no need to maintain two different rpm. so we can close this.

It is replied by Vinay , there is no need to maintain two different rpm. so we can close this.

LDT-2004-4 drybicart updates

    • -5
    • +15
    /firmware/App/Controllers/DryBiCart.c
    • -1
    • +1
    /firmware/App/Modes/ModePreGenDialysate.c
For these functions that set specific valves, we should specify which (e.g. recovery valves or balancing chamber valves, or ...).

For these functions that set specific valves, we should specify which (e.g. recovery valves or balancing chamber valves, or ...).

Remove blank line.

Remove blank line.

LEAHI-DD-FIRMWARE-LDT-3222_Command to override all balancing chamber valves states should be the same priority as setting individual valve state overrides
LEAHI-DD-FIRMWARE-LDT-3222_Command to override all balancing chamber valves states should be the same priority as setting individual valve state overrides
LDT-3222: Updated variable initialization for the function testBCValveStatesOverride

LDT-2004-3 dry bicart feature update

It will be fixed in Balancing chamber re-implementation

It will be fixed in Balancing chamber re-implementation