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 #559, Rename set force fail #646

Merged

Conversation

zanzaben
Copy link
Contributor

@zanzaben zanzaben commented Nov 6, 2020

Describe the contribution
Fixes #559 by changing UT_SetForceFail to UT_SetDefaultReturnValue

Testing performed
Build and run unit test

Expected behavior changes
No impact to behavior

System(s) tested on
Ubuntu 20.04

Additional context

Contributor Info - All information REQUIRED for consideration of pull request
Alex Campbell - NASA/GSFC

Copy link
Contributor

@skliper skliper left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Recommending a ticket to change UT_ClearForceFail to UT_ClearDefaultReturnValue.

@zanzaben zanzaben added the CCB:Ready Pull request is ready for discussion at the Configuration Control Board (CCB) label Nov 12, 2020
@astrogeco astrogeco changed the title Fix559 rename set force fail Fix #559, Rename set force fail Nov 12, 2020
@jphickey
Copy link
Contributor

jphickey commented Nov 12, 2020

I'd also recommend instead of using a simple #define for backward compatibility - make it an inline function e.g.:

static inline void UT_SetForceFail(UT_EntryKey_t FuncKey, int32 Value)
{
    UT_SetDefaultReturnValue(FuncKey, Value);
}

If nothing else this just makes it more like the patterns used elsewhere. The whole thing can go into a #ifndef OSAL_OMIT_DEPRECATED block.

@astrogeco astrogeco added CCB-20201112 and removed CCB:Ready Pull request is ready for discussion at the Configuration Control Board (CCB) labels Nov 13, 2020
@astrogeco astrogeco changed the base branch from main to integration-candidate November 23, 2020 06:09
@skliper
Copy link
Contributor

skliper commented Nov 23, 2020

I recommend avoiding merging main into a feature branch. Preference is to rebase the feature on main. You can always do a soft reset and recommit to fix this.

@astrogeco astrogeco merged commit 0551368 into nasa:integration-candidate Dec 1, 2020
astrogeco added a commit to astrogeco/cFS that referenced this pull request Dec 1, 2020
astrogeco added a commit to astrogeco/cFS that referenced this pull request Dec 2, 2020
@zanzaben zanzaben deleted the fix559-Rename-SetForceFail branch December 31, 2020 17:29
@zanzaben zanzaben restored the fix559-Rename-SetForceFail branch December 31, 2020 17:29
@zanzaben zanzaben deleted the fix559-Rename-SetForceFail branch January 7, 2021 14:40
@skliper skliper added this to the 6.0.0 milestone Sep 24, 2021
jphickey pushed a commit to jphickey/osal that referenced this pull request Aug 10, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

UT_SetForceFail is a misnomer
4 participants