Correct return code mismatches in CFE #1705
Comments
jphickey
added a commit
to jphickey/cFE
that referenced
this issue
Jul 23, 2021
Make sure functions documented as CFE status check for CFE_SUCCESS, and functions documented as OSAL status check for OS_SUCCESS.
astrogeco
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jul 29, 2021
Fix #1705, correct return code mismatches
paulober
pushed a commit
to paulober/cFE
that referenced
this issue
Aug 1, 2021
Make sure functions documented as CFE status check for CFE_SUCCESS, and functions documented as OSAL status check for OS_SUCCESS.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
In several places across CFE, a function is documented as returning a CFE status (e.g. CFE_SUCCESS) but checked against either OS_SUCCESS or CFE_PSP_SUCCESS, or vice versa.
Describe the solution you'd like
Functions documented as returning CFE status should check for
CFE_SUCCESS, where functions documented as returning an OSAL status should check forOS_SUCCESS, and functions returning a PSP status should check forCFE_PSP_SUCCESS.Additional context
Similar to #1698, but found in more places. Since the definition of all these symbols is 0, this is no change in practice, but should be fixed for correctness sake.
Requester Info
Joseph Hickey, Vantage Systems, Inc.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: