Add support for the Canis Labs CANPico shield for the Raspberry Pi Pico #97653
Conversation
zephyrbot
added
area: Boards/SoCs
area: Devicetree
area: Devicetree Bindings
area: Shields
zephyrbot
requested review from
avisconti,
decsny,
erwango,
jfischer-no,
kartben,
mbolivar and
rruuaanng
There was a problem hiding this comment.
very huge file :) please use the attached
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I hadn't paid attention to the image file size. I reformatted the original image to more appropriate dimensions and size. Though if you insist, I can replace it with the alternate you proposed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I hadn't paid attention to the image file size. I reformatted the original image to more appropriate dimensions and size. Though if you insist, I can replace it with the alternate you proposed.
Given it's basically smaller in size, better quality, and has a transparent background, I might actually insist :) Thanks!
| @@ -0,0 +1,171 @@ | |||
| .. _mcp251xFD_shield: | |||
|
|
|||
| Microchip MCP2517FD/MCP2518FD CAN bus shields | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
unless you're reasonably confident there are/will be other shields using the same chip, it would vote for putting in a folder just named after the shield and have the doc page just focus on that shield
cc @henrikbrixandersen
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Agreed.
This is a dedicated shield for the raspberry pi (unlike e.g. the more generic MCP2515 shields, which reside in a common folder).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@kartben @henrikbrixandersen - Hmm ... while I don't plan (read: "need") to implement support for them, the Seed Studio "2-Channel CAN-BUS(FD) Shield for Raspberry Pi" and the MikroElektronika "MCP2518FD Click" with appropriate carrier shield could be added if the current structure is retained.
If you both feel strongly that I should rearrange this for only the CANPico, I will. What is your recommendation?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please rearrange as already requested.
Add Canis Automotive Labs vendor prefix. Signed-off-by: Steve Boylan <[email protected]>
ThreeEights
force-pushed
the
can-pico-shield
branch
from
955ca5d to
9dc6dbf
Compare
|
Added some necessary cleanup. |
ThreeEights
force-pushed
the
can-pico-shield
branch
2 times, most recently
from
ac4bcca to
b5abc2a
Compare
|
@kartben @henrikbrixandersen - As requested, this has been trimmed to include only the CANPico, and the image has been replaced with the .webp file. |
ThreeEights
force-pushed
the
can-pico-shield
branch
from
b5abc2a to
765b7e0
Compare
| transceiver. The CANPico is a carrier board in a ‘sock’ format for a | ||
| Raspberry Pi Pico family. | ||
|
|
||
| .. figure:: canis-canpico.jpg |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| .. figure:: canis-canpico.jpg | |
| .. figure:: canis-canpico.webp |
| @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@ | |||
| shields: | |||
| - name: canis_canpico | |||
| full_name: Canis Labs CANPico | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| full_name: Canis Labs CANPico | |
| full_name: CANPico |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That change is not consistent with other shields. A selection:
./sparkfun_sara_r4/shield.yml: full_name: Sparkfun Sara R4
./waveshare_epaper/shield.yml: full_name: WAVESHARE e-Paper GDEH029A1
./st_b_cams_omv_mb1683/shield.yml: full_name: ST B-CAMS-OMV MB1683 Camera Shield
./adafruit_vcnl4040/shield.yml: full_name: Adafruit VCNL4040 Proximity and Lux Sensor Shield
./rk043fn02h_ct/shield.yml: full_name: RK043FN02H-CT 4.3" LCD Panel
./mikroe_eth3_click/shield.yml: full_name: ETH3 Click
./lmp90100_evb/shield.yml: full_name: LMP90100 Sensor AFE Evaluation Board
./nrf7002ek/shield.yml: full_name: nRF7002 Evaluation Kit Shield
./npm6001_ek/shield.yml: full_name: nPM6001 EK
./x_nucleo_iks02a1/shield.yml: full_name: X-NUCLEO-IKS02A1 (Standard / Mode 1)
./arduino_modulino_thermo/shield.yml: full_name: Arduino Modulino Thermo
Do you insist on this change?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ThreeEights
If i need to fight or insist for every request change I think you can agree that this will quickly become exhausting.
Most shields (and boards for that matter) do not have vendor in their name. When they do, it's typically because that's the official / most prominent product name one would find on vendor website, or e.g. in the top results in their favourite search engine.
See e.g. https://www.adafruit.com/product/4161?srsltid=AfmBOooXOsEAM1UFkhs34iq4Nq9wEXZHGZqhDfg3-VhPQAMyL8Xm6Pwm, https://www.sparkfun.com/sparkfun-micromod-asset-tracker-carrier-board.html. Sometiemes it's also to help disambiguate synonyms.
In the case of CANPico, I think you can safely get rid of it but I certainly don't want to spend another 10 minutes justifying my choice or "insisting" for you to agree to apply it :|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
FWIW I also took the liberty to make that comment because I knew you were coming back to this PR anyway. Not sure I understand the rationale of not applying the change while you were there fixing the image file name but oh well :|
Thanks for the PR anyway, this is really cool to see so many new shields added in this release :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@kartben - Please have pity on us poor mortals who don't live and breathe Zephyr. I'm not trying to create problems or extra work for anyone here. Try to understand how frustrating this week has been for me: First was the problem with the image. After I corrected it, I was asked to replace it. Alas, I'd not heard of the webp format; asking around our team, two people had heard of it but not used it. Now I've learned that it's the cat's pajamas, the bee's knees, and seems to be the preferred format for Zephyr in the future.
Then came the request to reorganize the files to focus only on the CANPico. I had originally followed the time-honored practice of copying the existing structure for the mcp2815 shields, assuming it would be nice to accommodate other products based on the newer chips. But, of course, pointing that out did not change the opinions of the reviewers.
Now this latest request, which appears to me to be incorrect. I failed to follow your explanation in this case; the two specific examples you mention seem to contradict your explanation:
sparkfun_carrier_asset_tracker/shield.yml: full_name: SparkFun MicroMod Asset Tracker Shield
adafruit_vcnl4040/shield.yml: full_name: Adafruit VCNL4040 Proximity and Lux Sensor Shield
I don't want to waste any more of your time, but please let me know if the current full_name might possibly be acceptable, or can you enlighten me further so my future pull requests will meet the high standards expected for contributions to Zephyr?
And thank you for investing so much effort on this one little piece of this grand edifice!
Steve
ThreeEights
force-pushed
the
can-pico-shield
branch
from
765b7e0 to
70099a5
Compare
Add support for shields based on the Microchip MCP251xFD CAN Bus controllers, along with the Canis Automotive Labs CANPico shield for the Raspberry Pi Pico. Updated to focus on only the CANPico shield. Use alternate image for shield. Corrected image file extension. Signed-off-by: Steve Boylan <[email protected]>
ThreeEights
force-pushed
the
can-pico-shield
branch
from
70099a5 to
7e1e021
Compare
|
4 participants
Add support for the Canis Automotive Labs CANPico shield for the Raspberry Pi Pico.