features: add experimental gpio-chardev-interface flag #15014
Conversation
Due to limitations imposed by the kernel support, the gpio-chardev interface is considered experimental and needs experimental.gpio-chardev-support setting to be enabled in snapd, either explicitly at runtime or through the defaults section in gadget.yaml. Signed-off-by: Zeyad Gouda <[email protected]>
|
Thu Feb 6 14:10:46 UTC 2025 No spread failures reported |
features/features.go
Outdated
| @@ -124,6 +126,8 @@ var featureNames = map[SnapdFeature]string{ | |||
| ConfdbControl: "confdb-control", | |||
|
|
|||
| AppArmorPrompting: "apparmor-prompting", | |||
|
|
|||
| GPIOChardevSupport: "gpio-chardev-support", | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
other options could be gpio-chardev-interface{,-support}, but I'm fine with the current flag name too
@pedronis do yo have any suggestions here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't have strong opinions here, but I prefer gpio-chardev-interface.
| @@ -124,6 +126,8 @@ var featureNames = map[SnapdFeature]string{ | |||
| ConfdbControl: "confdb-control", | |||
|
|
|||
| AppArmorPrompting: "apparmor-prompting", | |||
|
|
|||
| GPIOChardevSupport: "gpio-chardev-support", | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| // featuresEnabledWhenUnset contains a set of features that are enabled when not explicitly configured. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
there's a featuresExported which I can't comment on as it's too far from the changed chunks of code, but unless flags cleanup is a problem, I would try to make this future proof and export a flag too, just in case we need it
There was a problem hiding this comment.
good point, updated
Signed-off-by: Zeyad Gouda <[email protected]>
|
I think gpio-chardev-interface is fine/better
…On Wed, Feb 5, 2025 at 12:22 PM Zeyad Yasser ***@***.***> wrote:
***@***.**** commented on this pull request.
------------------------------
In features/features.go
<#15014 (comment)>:
> @@ -124,6 +126,8 @@ var featureNames = map[SnapdFeature]string{
ConfdbControl: "confdb-control",
AppArmorPrompting: "apparmor-prompting",
+
+ GPIOChardevSupport: "gpio-chardev-support",
I don't have strong opinions here, but I prefer gpio-chardev-interface.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#15014 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAHOHDOXVWAUOQ26R7E2VML2OHX6PAVCNFSM6AAAAABWLZA5JSVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43YUDVNRWFEZLROVSXG5CSMV3GSZLXHMZDKOJVGM4DCNJRG4>
.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #15014 +/- ##
=========================================
Coverage ? 78.25%
=========================================
Files ? 1157
Lines ? 154215
Branches ? 0
=========================================
Hits ? 120685
Misses ? 26100
Partials ? 7430
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Signed-off-by: Zeyad Gouda <[email protected]>
ZeyadYasser
changed the title
Due to limitations imposed by the kernel support, the
gpio-chardevinterface (not implemented yet) is considered experimental and needsexperimental.gpio-chardev-interfacesetting to be enabled in snapd, either explicitly at runtime or through the defaults section in gadget.yaml.