You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Is it necessary those checks to be hard error?
It is often particular chips don't have some registers. And we need to create individual rule for them which complicates all patch system.
I'd prefer this check be just warning saying "Rule ignored: register not found". Or something like this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Yea, maybe we could have a "-v" verbose mode that prints those errors, and otherwise they are silently ignored. For example we don't have any error at the moment if you try to delete something that doesn't exist, so it's not like we're consistent here anyway.
Having the verbose mode helps when trying to find out why your patch is not working, but we probably don't need the warning the rest of the time.
My question is about this check:
https://github.com/stm32-rs/svdtools/blob/d8521cd0dc0314365097edcac75ccbb1fa19864c/svdtools/patch.py#L1037-L1038
Is it necessary those checks to be hard error?
It is often particular chips don't have some registers. And we need to create individual rule for them which complicates all patch system.
I'd prefer this check be just warning saying "Rule ignored: register not found". Or something like this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: