dd-firmware / firmware / App / Modes

FPModes

Clone Tools

Stats

Commits this week: 3
Total Committers: 10
Last Commit: 12:47
Commits this week: 3

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 seconds ago
All Commits Reviews
Constraints
Constraints: committers
 
Constraints: files
Constraints: dates
Today
7 hrs ago

Sean Nash

See my comment above. We should return BOOL so Dialin request can be ACK/NAK'd.

See my comment above. We should return BOOL so Dialin request can be ACK/NAK'd.

7 hrs ago

Sean Nash

No faults from Dialin commands - we never want Dialin to cause system to go to fault because it requested something invalid - we only NAK the invalid request. We should do whatever is needed (if an...

No faults from Dialin commands - we never want Dialin to cause system to go to fault because it requested something invalid - we only NAK the invalid request.
We should do whatever is needed (if anything) to start the mode normally in an else.
And we should return TRUE/FALSE in these signal functions so that when it's called from Dialin msg handler, the msg handler can return ACK/NAK to Dialin if sub mode is invalid.

7 hrs ago

Sean Nash

We shouldn't request op mode until we're sure we're happy with the whole thing. Need to determine whether we are already in the op mode being requested. If so, no need to request it again - just re...

We shouldn't request op mode until we're sure we're happy with the whole thing.
Need to determine whether we are already in the op mode being requested. If so, no need to request it again - just request new sub mode if not already in it. If not, the currentSubMode checked below is not relevant (applies to current mode, not the requested mode) and we need to request new op mode and signal that new op mode that we will want to start in a specific sub mode.

8 hrs ago

Sean Nash

Declarations should be at top of scope (right before memcpy).

Declarations should be at top of scope (right before memcpy).

8 hrs ago

Sean Nash

Do we need this function? Can we do these 2 assignments in the Dialin msg handler function?

Do we need this function? Can we do these 2 assignments in the Dialin msg handler function?

8 hrs ago

Sean Nash

When moving this code to a function, the (requested) mode and sub mode should be passed in as parameters.

When moving this code to a function, the (requested) mode and sub mode should be passed in as parameters.

8 hrs ago

Sean Nash

I don't think this code should be here. Should be moved to a function and called - probably not from here though. Can we call function with this code from the Dialin msg handler?

I don't think this code should be here. Should be moved to a function and called - probably not from here though. Can we call function with this code from the Dialin msg handler?

9 hrs ago

Raghu Kallala

Shall I add the SW_Fault as an else case if an invalid submode was requested for an opmode? Sean NashMichael Garthwaite please confirm

Shall I add the SW_Fault as an else case if an invalid submode was requested for an opmode?
Sean NashMichael Garthwaite please confirm

10 hrs ago

Raghu Kallala

I was thinking we could return BOOL to check if the request was successful, added it. But as you clarified the dialin response will only confirm the delivery of message successfully, I can change ...

I was thinking we could return BOOL to check if the request was successful, added it.

But as you clarified the dialin response will only confirm the delivery of message successfully, I can change all these signal functions to void
Thanks!

12 hrs ago

Michael Garthwaite

Yes since you're not using the return value in execOpModes()

Yes since you're not using the return value in execOpModes()

Thursday 05 Mar
7:32 am

Dara Navaei

LEAHI-DD-FIRMWARE-LDT-3603_Ability to set operation sub mode on IOFP sub system
LEAHI-DD-FIRMWARE-LDT-3603_Ability to set operation sub mode on IOFP sub system
Tuesday 24 Feb
11:55 am

Vendor - TEL - Jashwant Gantyada

10:35 am

Raghu Kallala , Vinayakam Mani and Sean Nash

Monday 23 Feb
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.

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 ?

12:22 am

Vendor - TEL - Sameer Poyil

We don't need this complex logic . use getFPGAVersions() function

We don't need this complex logic . use getFPGAVersions() function