Skip to content

Remove Unneeded nordic-bsp Folder from Cordio #13753

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 2, 2020
Merged

Remove Unneeded nordic-bsp Folder from Cordio #13753

merged 1 commit into from
Nov 2, 2020

Conversation

AGlass0fMilk
Copy link
Member

Summary of changes

The nordic-bsp folder is not needed since the Cordio BSP functions are not used.

They can therefore be removed from the index.

Impact of changes

None

Migration actions required

None

Documentation

None

Pull request type 

[x] Patch update (Bug fix / Target update / Docs update / Test update / Refactor)
[] Feature update (New feature / Functionality change / New API)
[] Major update (Breaking change E.g. Return code change / API behaviour change)

Test results 

[] No Tests required for this change (E.g docs only update)
[x] Covered by existing mbed-os tests (Greentea or Unittest)
[] Tests / results supplied as part of this PR

Reviewers

@pan- @paul-szczepanek-arm

@pan-
Copy link
Member

pan- commented Oct 12, 2020

@AGlass0fMilk Is is causing any issue for you ? We try to keep the cordio stack as close as possible to the original material.

@ciarmcom ciarmcom added the release-type: patch Indentifies a PR as containing just a patch label Oct 12, 2020
@ciarmcom
Copy link
Member

@AGlass0fMilk, thank you for your changes.
@pan- @paul-szczepanek-arm @ARMmbed/mbed-os-maintainers please review.

@ciarmcom ciarmcom requested review from pan-, paul-szczepanek-arm and a team October 12, 2020 14:30
@AGlass0fMilk
Copy link
Member Author

@AGlass0fMilk Is is causing any issue for you ? We try to keep the cordio stack as close as possible to the original material.

Hi @pan-, yes it is causing some issues with my attempt to update Nordic targets from SDK15 to the nrfx driver lib. Eliminating dependence on nRF SDK-specific files and basing the HAL implementation on just nrfx will allow mbed to easily support nearly all current Nordic chips and future ones.

The SDK is really unnecessary now because the drivers are almost entirely on the nrfx API anyway and Mbed OS no longer supports using the Nordic softdevice.

Retaining this Cordio directory introduces unneeded dependencies to nRF SDK files... so they should be ignored or removed.

@AGlass0fMilk
Copy link
Member Author

@pan- Alternatively, we can add a .mbedignore to ignore this directory from the build. This will eliminate the need to modify the Cordio stack when you guys integrate a new version.

Is this an acceptable path forward?

@pan-
Copy link
Member

pan- commented Oct 12, 2020

@AGlass0fMilk Thanks for the clarification. I'd prefer the second option of adding an mbed ignore file. It will make maintainers lives easier.

@AGlass0fMilk
Copy link
Member Author

@pan- I have updated the PR as discussed above.

0xc0170
0xc0170 reviewed Oct 13, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@0xc0170 0xc0170 left a comment •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

will they be used ? Shouldn't these be removed?

@AGlass0fMilk Thanks for the clarification. I'd prefer the second option of adding an mbed ignore file. It will make maintainers lives easier.

I assume it was removed and now it is just ignored. What we should do with CMake, just ignore as well?

@AGlass0fMilk
Copy link
Member Author

will they be used ? Shouldn't these be removed?

@AGlass0fMilk Thanks for the clarification. I'd prefer the second option of adding an mbed ignore file. It will make maintainers lives easier.

I assume it was removed and now it is just ignored. What we should do with CMake, just ignore as well?

Yes they should be ignored since they are not linked into the resulting binary. They just introduce dependencies on header files that are in the nRF SDK that conflict with updating to nrfx.

The justification for not removing them I assume is fewer steps to remember when copying over the Cordio stack files.

@mergify mergify bot added needs: CI and removed needs: review labels Oct 14, 2020
@0xc0170
Copy link
Contributor

0xc0170 commented Oct 15, 2020

CI started

@mbed-ci
Copy link

mbed-ci commented Oct 15, 2020

Jenkins CI Test : ✔️ SUCCESS

Build Number: 1 | 🔒 Jenkins CI Job | 🌐 Logs & Artifacts

CLICK for Detailed Summary

jobs Status
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_unittests ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-GCC_ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_dynamic-memory-usage ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_greentea-test ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_cloud-client-pytest ✔️

@0xc0170
Copy link
Contributor

0xc0170 commented Oct 16, 2020

@pan- @paul-szczepanek-arm Please review, if it is good as it is after the last update

pan-
pan- approved these changes Oct 20, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@pan- pan- left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@0xc0170
Copy link
Contributor

0xc0170 commented Oct 26, 2020

As the CI run days ago, I'll rerun and then merge if all green.

@mbed-ci
Copy link

mbed-ci commented Oct 27, 2020

Jenkins CI Test : ❌ FAILED

Build Number: 2 | 🔒 Jenkins CI Job | 🌐 Logs & Artifacts

CLICK for Detailed Summary

jobs Status
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-ARM ❌
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-GCC_ARM ❌
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_unittests ✔️

@0xc0170
Copy link
Contributor

0xc0170 commented Nov 2, 2020

Internal exception, restarted CI

@mbed-ci
Copy link

mbed-ci commented Nov 2, 2020

Jenkins CI Test : ✔️ SUCCESS

Build Number: 3 | 🔒 Jenkins CI Job | 🌐 Logs & Artifacts

CLICK for Detailed Summary

jobs Status
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_unittests ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-greentea-ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-greentea-GCC_ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-cloud-example-ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-example-ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-example-GCC_ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_build-cloud-example-GCC_ARM ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_dynamic-memory-usage ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_greentea-test ✔️
jenkins-ci/mbed-os-ci_cloud-client-pytest ✔️

@0xc0170
Copy link
Contributor

0xc0170 commented Nov 2, 2020

Travis run (due to the travis org change, we got 2 statuses). I'll merge.

@0xc0170 0xc0170 merged commit eb6b53a into ARMmbed:master Nov 2, 2020
@mergify mergify bot removed the ready for merge label Nov 2, 2020
@mbedmain mbedmain added release-version: 6.5.0 Release-pending and removed release-type: patch Indentifies a PR as containing just a patch Release-pending labels Nov 18, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@pan- pan- pan- approved these changes

@0xc0170 0xc0170 0xc0170 approved these changes

@paul-szczepanek-arm paul-szczepanek-arm Awaiting requested review from paul-szczepanek-arm

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
release-version: 6.5.0
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
6 participants
@AGlass0fMilk @pan- @ciarmcom @0xc0170 @mbed-ci @mbedmain