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

[WiFiScan] Fix clear 'scanning bit' and clear scanCount #11075

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

TD-er
Copy link
Contributor

@TD-er TD-er commented Mar 11, 2025

WIFI_SCANNING_BIT may not always be cleared on timeout. Also _scanCount will only be cleared if there is a _scanResult.

See: #8952

N.B. this is a summary of discussion with @me-no-dev
Still a draft

`WIFI_SCANNING_BIT` may not always be cleared on timeout.
Also `_scanCount` will only be cleared if there is a `_scanResult`.

See: espressif#8952
Copy link
Contributor

Warnings
⚠️

Some issues found for the commit messages in this PR:

  • the commit message "[WiFiScan] Fix clear 'scanning bit' and clear scanCount":
    • summary looks empty
    • type/action looks empty

Please fix these commit messages - here are some basic tips:

  • follow Conventional Commits style
  • correct format of commit message should be: <type/action>(<scope/component>): <summary>, for example fix(esp32): Fixed startup timeout issue
  • allowed types are: change,ci,docs,feat,fix,refactor,remove,revert,test
  • sufficiently descriptive message summary should be between 10 to 72 characters and start with upper case letter
  • avoid Jira references in commit messages (unavailable/irrelevant for our customers)

TIP: Install pre-commit hooks and run this check when committing (uses the Conventional Precommit Linter).

👋 Hello TD-er, we appreciate your contribution to this project!


📘 Please review the project's Contributions Guide for key guidelines on code, documentation, testing, and more.

🖊️ Please also make sure you have read and signed the Contributor License Agreement for this project.

Click to see more instructions ...


This automated output is generated by the PR linter DangerJS, which checks if your Pull Request meets the project's requirements and helps you fix potential issues.

DangerJS is triggered with each push event to a Pull Request and modify the contents of this comment.

Please consider the following:
- Danger mainly focuses on the PR structure and formatting and can't understand the meaning behind your code or changes.
- Danger is not a substitute for human code reviews; it's still important to request a code review from your colleagues.
- Resolve all warnings (⚠️ ) before requesting a review from human reviewers - they will appreciate it.
- To manually retry these Danger checks, please navigate to the Actions tab and re-run last Danger workflow.

Review and merge process you can expect ...


We do welcome contributions in the form of bug reports, feature requests and pull requests.

1. An internal issue has been created for the PR, we assign it to the relevant engineer.
2. They review the PR and either approve it or ask you for changes or clarifications.
3. Once the GitHub PR is approved we do the final review, collect approvals from core owners and make sure all the automated tests are passing.
- At this point we may do some adjustments to the proposed change, or extend it by adding tests or documentation.
4. If the change is approved and passes the tests it is merged into the default branch.

Generated by 🚫 dangerJS against 49a45cc

Copy link
Contributor

Memory usage test (comparing PR against master branch)

The table below shows the summary of memory usage change (decrease - increase) in bytes and percentage for each target.

MemoryFLASH [bytes]FLASH [%]RAM [bytes]RAM [%]
TargetDECINCDECINCDECINCDECINC
ESP32P40⚠️ +60.000.00000.000.00
ESP32S3000.000.00000.000.00
ESP32S2000.000.00000.000.00
ESP32C30⚠️ +60.000.00000.000.00
ESP32C60⚠️ +60.000.00000.000.00
ESP32000.000.00000.000.00
Click to expand the detailed deltas report [usage change in BYTES]
TargetESP32P4ESP32S3ESP32S2ESP32C3ESP32C6ESP32
ExampleFLASHRAMFLASHRAMFLASHRAMFLASHRAMFLASHRAMFLASHRAM
WiFi/examples/FTM/FTM_Initiator000000000000
WiFi/examples/FTM/FTM_Responder000000000000
WiFi/examples/SimpleWiFiServer000000000000
WiFi/examples/WiFiAccessPoint000000000000
WiFi/examples/WiFiClient000000000000
WiFi/examples/WiFiClientBasic⚠️ +600000⚠️ +60⚠️ +6000
WiFi/examples/WiFiClientConnect000000000000
WiFi/examples/WiFiClientEvents000000000000
WiFi/examples/WiFiClientStaticIP000000000000
WiFi/examples/WiFiExtender000000000000
WiFi/examples/WiFiIPv6000000000000
WiFi/examples/WiFiMulti⚠️ +600000⚠️ +60⚠️ +6000
WiFi/examples/WiFiMultiAdvanced⚠️ +600000⚠️ +60⚠️ +6000
WiFi/examples/WiFiScan⚠️ +400000⚠️ +40⚠️ +4000
WiFi/examples/WiFiScanAsync⚠️ +400000⚠️ +40⚠️ +4000
WiFi/examples/WiFiScanDualAntenna⚠️ +400000⚠️ +60⚠️ +4000
WiFi/examples/WiFiScanTime⚠️ +600000⚠️ +40⚠️ +6000
WiFi/examples/WiFiTelnetToSerial⚠️ +600000⚠️ +60⚠️ +6000
WiFi/examples/WiFiUDPClient000000000000
WiFi/examples/WPS--0000000000
WiFi/examples/WiFiBlueToothSwitch--00--000000
WiFi/examples/WiFiClientEnterprise--0000000000
WiFi/examples/WiFiSmartConfig--0000000000

Copy link
Contributor

Test Results

 76 files   76 suites   14m 39s ⏱️
 38 tests  38 ✅ 0 💤 0 ❌
241 runs  241 ✅ 0 💤 0 ❌

Results for commit 49a45cc.

@me-no-dev
Copy link
Member

Closing in favor of #11188

@me-no-dev me-no-dev closed this Mar 27, 2025
@TD-er TD-er deleted the patch-2 branch March 27, 2025 13:50
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.

2 participants