Skip to content
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

Fix #146, Support scheduled uplink check #162

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 18, 2024

Conversation

skliper
Copy link
Contributor

@skliper skliper commented Nov 15, 2023

Describe the contribution

Note this took the alternative approach described in #146, just supports scheduling (not a timer and child task).

Testing performed
Built/ran/confirmed nominal behavior
Sent a read uplink request and confirmed expected behavior

Expected behavior changes
None by default, if you send a read uplink request it'll switch to only process packets on request

System(s) tested on

  • Hardware: Docker
  • OS: Ubuntu 22
  • Versions: Mostly main + project customization

Additional context
None

Third party code
None

Contributor Info - All information REQUIRED for consideration of pull request
Jacob Hageman - NASA/GSFC

@skliper skliper added the CCB:Ready Pull request is ready for discussion at the Configuration Control Board (CCB) label Nov 15, 2023
Copy link
Contributor

@jphickey jphickey left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just to confirm -- looks like this will use the existing logic until the first READ_UPLINK_MID is sent, after which it will only forward based on READ_UPLINK_MID reception.

That seems like it should work OK for now. Ideally, CI lab should have a table for this type of config in the future...

@dmknutsen dmknutsen added CCB:Approved Indicates code approval by CCB and removed CCB:Ready Pull request is ready for discussion at the Configuration Control Board (CCB) labels Dec 14, 2023
@skliper skliper force-pushed the fix146-consistent_uplink_processing branch from d17cb04 to 9545afa Compare January 11, 2024 15:17
@skliper
Copy link
Contributor Author

skliper commented Jan 11, 2024

@dzbaker Rebased and resolved conflicts. I think this should be ready (already approved).

dzbaker added a commit to nasa/cFS that referenced this pull request Jan 18, 2024
*Combines:*

ci_lab equuleus-rc1+dev51
cFE equuleus-rc1+dev79
osal equuleus-rc1+dev37

**Includes:**

*ci_lab*
- nasa/ci_lab#162
- nasa/ci_lab#171

*cFE*
- nasa/cFE#2494

*osal*
- nasa/osal#1436

Co-authored by: Jacob Hageman <skliper@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored by: Andrew Hatstat <ahatstat@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored by: Dylan Baker <dzbaker@users.noreply.github.com>
@dzbaker dzbaker mentioned this pull request Jan 18, 2024
2 tasks
dzbaker added a commit to nasa/cFS that referenced this pull request Jan 18, 2024
*Combines:*

ci_lab equuleus-rc1+dev51
cFE equuleus-rc1+dev79
osal equuleus-rc1+dev37

**Includes:**

*ci_lab*
- nasa/ci_lab#162
- nasa/ci_lab#171

*cFE*
- nasa/cFE#2494

*osal*
- nasa/osal#1436

Co-authored by: Jacob Hageman <skliper@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored by: Andrew Hatstat <ahatstat@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored by: Dylan Baker <dzbaker@users.noreply.github.com>
@dzbaker dzbaker merged commit 08bd1f1 into nasa:main Jan 18, 2024
11 checks passed
dzbaker added a commit to nasa/cFS that referenced this pull request Jan 18, 2024
*Combines:*

ci_lab equuleus-rc1+dev51
cFE equuleus-rc1+dev79
osal equuleus-rc1+dev37

**Includes:**

*ci_lab*
- nasa/ci_lab#162
- nasa/ci_lab#171

*cFE*
- nasa/cFE#2494

*osal*
- nasa/osal#1436

Co-authored by: Jacob Hageman <skliper@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored by: Andrew Hatstat <ahatstat@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored by: Dylan Baker <dzbaker@users.noreply.github.com>
@skliper skliper deleted the fix146-consistent_uplink_processing branch April 1, 2024 14:39
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
CCB:Approved Indicates code approval by CCB
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Consistent uplink processing
4 participants