-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3k
Increase events.share-eventsize to 768B because of ESP8266 AT driver and asynchronous DNS #9799
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
mbedgt: test case report:
|
@VeijoPesonen, thank you for your changes. |
features/netsocket/NetworkStack.cpp
Outdated
} | ||
} | ||
|
||
return NSAPI_ERROR_OK; | ||
EXIT: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Make this block name as NO_MEM
, and get rid of the "ret = " temporary variable, as it serves no purpose.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Fixed
@teetak01, @simosillankorva for your information |
@VeijoPesonen A style nit, but should be good to go afterwards: https://travis-ci.org/ARMmbed/mbed-os/jobs/496917472 |
@cmonr fixed. I should stop wasting other people's time and run the check myself...
|
Waiting for final reviews, started CI meanwhile |
Test run: FAILEDSummary: 1 of 1 test jobs failed Failed test jobs:
|
@0xc0170 , from CMakeError.log.
|
@VeijoPesonen , I think the failure is due to using mbed_error in NetworkStack. |
CI started |
Test run: FAILEDSummary: 1 of 1 test jobs failed Failed test jobs:
|
Thanks @michalpasztamobica , wouldn't have crossed my mind the issue would be something like that. |
Original value was too small once both ESP8266 driver and asynchronous DNS started to use shared event queue. An assumption is made that once shared event queue is taken into use there are going to be multiple users instead of one, for which the original value would have been sufficient.
Fixed, thanks @michalpasztamobica. @cmonr , would you please restart the CI. |
This PR is at risk of missing 5.12 release as it's marked as "needs: work". Code freeze is coming! On Friday 1st. Please made necessary updates ASAP and make sure the reviewers are aligned for prompt code inspection. |
CI started |
Test run: SUCCESSSummary: 12 of 12 test jobs passed |
Description
events.shared-eventsize: increased from 256B to 768B
Original value was too small once both ESP8266 driver and
asynchronous DNS started to use shared event queue. An assumption is
made that once shared event queue is taken into use there are going to
be multiple users instead of one, for which the original value would
have been sufficient.
Pull request type
Reviewers
@kjbracey-arm
@SeppoTakalo
@geky
@michalpasztamobica
Release Notes
"events.shared-eventsize" increased from 256B to 768B
Original value was too small once both ESP8266 driver and
asynchronous DNS started to use shared event queue. An assumption is
made that once shared event queue is taken into use there are going to
be multiple users instead of one, for which the original value would
have been sufficient.