Restore EVB-2 project for SPI testing #579
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think I misunderstood our discussion about this yesterday. While adding this all to the SDK seems... straight-forward? I don't think we want this in the SDK. Being that this is the public repo, I don't think we want this visible. Maybe, but I'd probably need to be convinced.
I'm more keen to move all this into a new EVB-2 repo, that builds off of is-common and SDK, like GPX does. Is that possible?
I think it is alright having it in the SDK for a few reasons:
|
| @@ -462,7 +462,7 @@ namespace ISFileManager { | |||
| std::string CurrentWorkingDirectory() | |||
| { | |||
| char curdir[256] = { 0 }; | |||
| if (_GETCWD(curdir, sizeof(curdir)) != nullptr) | |||
| if (_GETCWD(curdir, sizeof(curdir)) != 0) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Was there a reason to change this from nullptr? Technically, nullptr is correct, since this may result in warnings about type casting.
| @@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLI | |||
| #endif | |||
|
|
|||
| #if PLATFORM_IS_EMBEDDED | |||
| #include "drivers/d_time.h" | |||
| #include "d_time.h" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this using a different d_time.h? We should be including "drivers/d_time.h", since this removes ambiguity in the source file, and simplified the CMakeLists.txt. Changing this back to just "d_time.h" may actually break builds elsewhere.
| @@ -183,7 +183,7 @@ | |||
| typedef uint32_t pthread_t; | |||
| typedef uint32_t pthread_mutex_t; | |||
| typedef int lock_t; | |||
| typedef int DIR; | |||
| // typedef int DIR; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure the importance of DIR, but why would bringing back in the EVB source would need this removed?
This adds the EVB-2 project back so we have a way to test SPI on the IMX with the v2 protocol.