[PATCH] make the shell work on NIL again Topic is solved

Use this forum for requesting small changes in ChibiOS. Large changes should be discussed in the development forum. This forum is NOT for support.
Post Reply
electronic_eel
Posts: 95
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2016 8:07 pm
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 23 times

[PATCH] make the shell work on NIL again

Post by electronic_eel »

Hi,

the shell doesn't compile in current trunk when used with NIL. The reason is that the chThdShouldTerminateX() and chEvtObjectInit() functions are missing.

I attached a patch to fix this. I made the whole shell thread exit logic optional with the SHELL_EXIT_ENABLED define. This is enabled by default on RT, but disabled on NIL.

I also added another patch with small output improvements.

Would it make sense to have a testcase with shell and NIL? For example in testhal or demos. Then it would be more easy to spot problems like this in the future.

Thanks for considering.
Attachments
patch-shell-on-nil.zip
(2.55 KiB) Downloaded 450 times
User avatar
Giovanni
Site Admin
Posts: 14892
Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 8:48 am
Has thanked: 1202 times
Been thanked: 996 times

Re: [PATCH] make the shell work on NIL again

Post by Giovanni »

Hi,

Not merging, next NIL will be able to create/exit threads (it is already working look under /branches/nil_4_dev).

Giovanni
electronic_eel
Posts: 95
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2016 8:07 pm
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 23 times

Re: [PATCH] make the shell work on NIL again

Post by electronic_eel »

Giovanni wrote:next NIL will be able to create/exit threads

That is an even better solution than mine, thanks ;)

Do you also plan to implement the full events source/listener mechanism for the next NIL release, as hinted here: [INFO] Nil growing (not in size)?
User avatar
Giovanni
Site Admin
Posts: 14892
Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 8:48 am
Has thanked: 1202 times
Been thanked: 996 times

Re: [PATCH] make the shell work on NIL again

Post by Giovanni »

Hi,

It is an open point, now it would be able to support it.

Giovanni
Post Reply