cpu/cc2538: add GPIO_PIN() macro to periph_conf.h. #5507
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
A-Paul
added
Platform: ARM
|
@A-Paul Looks good. Eliminating |
|
👍 |
hexluthor
added
the
CI: ready for build
|
@A-Paul I'm ready to merge this. Do you still consider it a WIP? |
@hexluthor, no I remove the flag. Thank you. |
A-Paul
removed
the
State: WIP
lebrush
pushed a commit
to lebrush/RIOT
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 27, 2016
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Implement the specific
GPIO_PIN()macro for cc2538 cpu. Some new code, using this macro is not working as expected without a cpu-specific implementation.Uses a already existing macro (
GPIO_PXX_TO_NUM()) from cc2538_gpio.h which has exactly the same function.Other possible ways to implement it:
0. Define
GPIO_PIN()with the same "body" asGPIO_PXX_TO_NUM().0. Rename
GPIO_PXX_TO_NUM()toGPIO_PIN()in cc2538_gpio.h.I implemented what I assume the most obvious solution. If there is a different (and better) approach, make your proposals.