-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3k
NVStore.cpp compiler warning removal (os_ret) #10485
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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.
It is slightly worrying that the errors due to HW problems are detected only on debug-builds. If the remaining code survives from storage error, what is the point of assert here?
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
Do we expect hardware problems to be indicated by error returns from
flash
functions though?It's quite possible that the only error returns would be for parameter errors like address being out of range, and we only find out flash failure by actually trying to use it and finding it doesn't hold data correctly.
But I would agree that if these functions can indicate hardware problems, there should be paths to deal with that. Asserts should be reserved for catching should-be-impossible design errors.
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.
Tend to agree here. :-) But, well out of scope for this PR in a way.
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.
Please create a tracking issue for this.
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.
Done, IOTSTOR-832
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.
@kjbracey-arm at least some drivers seem to notify HW/driver problems, not just user errors:
mbed-os/drivers/FlashIAP.cpp
Line 204 in cc94690
->
mbed-os/targets/TARGET_Cypress/TARGET_PSOC6/flash_api.c
Lines 41 to 50 in d2e9fde