dd-firmware / firmware / App

Monitors

Clone Tools

Stats

Commits this week: 4
Total Committers: 14
Last Commit: 03 Mar
Commits this week: 4

Lines of code count not available

Commit Activity

Commits By Day In Week
52 week commits volume
Commits By Day In Week
Commits by day
Commits By Day In Week
Commits by hour
Commits By Hour In Day
Commit calendar
 

Most active committers (90 days)

loading
loading
  • last updated a few minutes ago
All Commits Reviews
Constraints
Constraints: committers
 
Constraints: files
Constraints: dates
Today
1 hr ago

Sean Nash

Use uppercase F

Use uppercase F

1 hr ago

Sean Nash

Please declare local variables at top of scope (line 309 in this case).

Please declare local variables at top of scope (line 309 in this case).

Tuesday 03 Mar
2:16 pm

Dara Navaei

Bamboo Commit: Updated the Copyright section and replaced tabs with 4 spaces

Options
    • -2
    • +2
    ./WaterQualityMonitor.c
2:13 pm

Michael Garthwaite

1:40 pm

Vinayakam Mani

Monday 02 Mar
1:52 pm

Raghu Kallala

1:13 pm

Michael Garthwaite

LDT-3514: wrapped ALARM_ID_FP_POWER_BUDGET_OUT_OF_RANGE around test config TEST_CONFIG_FP_DISABLE_RO_CURRENT_ALARM.

Options
    • -1
    • +5
    ./WaterQualityMonitor.c
1:03 pm

Dara Navaei

LEAHI-DD-FIRMWARE-LDT-3514_Dialin config request to disable IOFP current monitoring
LEAHI-DD-FIRMWARE-LDT-3514_Dialin config request to disable IOFP current monitoring
Tuesday 24 Feb
11:55 am

Vendor - TEL - Jashwant Gantyada

10:38 am

Dara Navaei

Bamboo Commit: Updated the Copyright section and replaced tabs with 4 spaces

Options
    • -2
    • +2
    ./Level.c
  2. … 11 more files in changeset.
10:35 am

Raghu Kallala , Vinayakam Mani and Sean Nash

Monday 23 Feb
1:37 pm

Raghu Kallala

LDT-3344 resolved merge conflicts with staging

Options
    • -3
    • +3
    ./Level.c
  2. … 4 more files in changeset.
1:18 pm

Vendor - TEL - Jashwant Gantyada

LEAHI-DD-FIRMWARE-LDT-3344_Firmware support for Beta 2 FPGA updates.
LEAHI-DD-FIRMWARE-LDT-3344_Firmware support for Beta 2 FPGA updates.
Friday 20 Feb
2:19 pm

Vendor - TEL - Sameer Poyil

This is total mess up . that is what I want it a clean implementation. created a ticket LDT-3563 and closing all review comments.

This is total mess up . that is what I want it a clean implementation. created a ticket LDT-3563 and closing all review comments.

2:17 pm

Vendor - TEL - Sameer Poyil

Removing all the review comments and created a ticket to handle it in separate ticket -LDT-3563

Removing all the review comments and created a ticket to handle it in separate ticket -LDT-3563

1:42 pm

Vendor - TEL - Jashwant Gantyada

removed.

removed.

1:42 pm

Vendor - TEL - Jashwant Gantyada

changed.

changed.

1:41 pm

Vendor - TEL - Jashwant Gantyada

removed.

removed.

12:50 pm

Raghu Kallala

the 2nd if statement for beta 1.0 is an ask from systems team to raise fault alarm if user by mistake enable Beta 2.0 config when Beta1.0 is active

the 2nd if statement for beta 1.0 is an ask from systems team to raise fault alarm if user by mistake enable Beta 2.0 config when Beta1.0 is active

11:03 am

Sean Nash

Noe says we can distinguish between beta 1.9 and 2.0 w/ ID (4 and 6). We still need test configs for beta 1.0 stuff and non-fpga differences. We can use DD fpga ID # here in this macro instead of t...

Noe says we can distinguish between beta 1.9 and 2.0 w/ ID (4 and 6).
We still need test configs for beta 1.0 stuff and non-fpga differences.
We can use DD fpga ID # here in this macro instead of test config.
Since this is all temporary, I'm not that concerned about how we do this so long as it works.

10:22 am

Sean Nash

I think Sameer is saying that the monitor should just call one get level function in FPGA and that one function (in FpgaDD.c) would handle all of this beta 1/1.9/2.0 stuff. I agree, but didn't comm...

I think Sameer is saying that the monitor should just call one get level function in FPGA and that one function (in FpgaDD.c) would handle all of this beta 1/1.9/2.0 stuff.
I agree, but didn't comment on it because it's all temporary anyway.

9:59 am

Sean Nash

Why do we need a get function to call another get function? The caller of this function should just call getFPGAGPIOStatus() and then we wouldn't need this.

Why do we need a get function to call another get function? The caller of this function should just call getFPGAGPIOStatus() and then we wouldn't need this.

9:46 am

Sean Nash

Move this up to public definitions section.

Move this up to public definitions section.

9:41 am

Sean Nash

These don't need to be initialized.

These don't need to be initialized.

8:13 am

Raghu Kallala

LDT-3344 fixed typo in function hheader

Options
    • -1
    • +1
    ./Level.c
7:59 am

Raghu Kallala

readFloaterLevelStatus is higher level functions that give the data from the FPGA. Reason why we had these get functions here is, based on the FPGA response we translate it to the user understandab...

readFloaterLevelStatus is higher level functions that give the data from the FPGA.
Reason why we had these get functions here is, based on the FPGA response we translate it to the user understandable enum values (low, medium, high)

7:55 am

Raghu Kallala

This is a reset call, as the default requirement is to be on Beta 1.9 HW The logic is checking if the user is resetting the Beta 2.0 config, if yes, we will have to fall back to the Beta 1.9 FPGA r...

This is a reset call, as the default requirement is to be on Beta 1.9 HW
The logic is checking if the user is resetting the Beta 2.0 config, if yes, we will have to fall back to the Beta 1.9 FPGA registers

1:05 am

Vendor - TEL - Sameer Poyil

Level.c is a higher level abstracted functions and should not implement the HW dependent details in this file. this details should be pushed to FPGADD. and single function should handle all the cas...

Level.c is a higher level abstracted functions and should not implement the HW dependent details in this file. this details should be pushed to FPGADD. and single function should handle all the cases instead of multiple functions.

12:29 am

Vendor - TEL - Sameer Poyil

Its not required, HW should be auto detected and initialized without any user configuration.

Its not required, HW should be auto detected and initialized without any user configuration.

12:25 am

Vendor - TEL - Sameer Poyil

why its checking beta 2 and then setting beta 1.9 HW ?

why its checking beta 2 and then setting beta 1.9 HW ?