Only esp8266 requires special handling for _F() #2699
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
PR Summary
|
slaff
added
3.5 - Approved - Waiting for CI results
and removed
3.5 - Approved - Waiting for CI results
labels
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
The dangling pointer warnings for the
_F()macro (discussed in #2659 and #2675) are affecting other builds. The purpose of the macro is to enforce word-aligned flash accesses on the esp8266: unaligned accesses result in a CPU exception. Other architectures do not have these alignment requirements.The
HostTestsapplication has been built and run on all other SOCs currently supported: rp2040, esp32, esp32c3, esp32s2. I do not have any esp32s3 devices to test against but these use the same xtensa LX7 core as the esp32s2.The net effect of this change is that the
_F()macro is transparent, soSerial.print("test string");andSerial.print(_F("test string");, for example, produce identical code for these SOCs. Continued use of the _F() macro is obviously necessary to ensure continued compatibility with esp8266.