-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 207
sdo.client: Add missing abort messages #594
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
Merged
acolomb
merged 9 commits into
canopen-python:master
from
acolomb:sdo-client-missing-aborts
Jul 13, 2025
Merged
Changes from 5 commits
Commits
Show all changes
9 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
fb5ea00
adding missing sdo aborts for sdo client
samsamfire 551e20a
adding some missing sdo aborts (timeout, unknown command)
samsamfire 14ecf12
Consistently format abort code literals.
acolomb 080d873
Fix typo (grammatical error in exception message).
acolomb 8beeba4
Avoid duplicate SDO abort messages on timeout.
acolomb cf34d24
Move SDO abort message sending to _block_ack() and _end_upload().
acolomb e020208
Ditch unused timeout_abort parameter again.
acolomb 3de9bce
Another literal format.
acolomb d02f3a7
Add docstring to read_response() and detail exceptions.
acolomb File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or 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
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Verified. But I'm not fond of using
0x0504_0000
directly in the code. They should rather be constants addressed by name. Add another PR for that?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sure, we can fix up the magic numbers in code in a follow-up. I'm usually very strict about that, but wanted to keep disruption low while we're looking at an actual bugfix.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Since we're touching the code with this PR, I think I would suggest doing a quick and dirty fix to add them as literals. It can still be made as a minimal disruption change. E.g. we don't need to make literals of all SDO Errors, just the few we touch here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Let's focus on the logic first. I will follow up with the literals change once this is merged. The bigger question is whether we want to get rid of the extra parameter again, as mentioned in #594 (comment)?