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

Improve consistency in application of CFE_SB_MsgIdToValue/ValueToMsgId conversions #90

Closed
jphickey opened this issue Sep 13, 2021 · 0 comments · Fixed by #91 or #92
Closed

Improve consistency in application of CFE_SB_MsgIdToValue/ValueToMsgId conversions #90

jphickey opened this issue Sep 13, 2021 · 0 comments · Fixed by #91 or #92
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@jphickey
Copy link
Contributor

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
A CFE_SB_MsgId_t value, like other IDs, is supposed to be a unique type/opaque value that identifies a message within the SB application context. Although it is currently implemented using an integer (uint32 specifically) application should not assume this. Instead, a set of macros and inline conversion functions (CFE_SB_MsgIdToValue and CFE_SB_ValueToMsgId) are provided for when the application needs to interpret the value as an integer for a valid purpose.

Describe the solution you'd like
Add conversions where they are currently missing

Additional context
See nasa/cFE#1945 for full info. A separate issue+PR will be submitted for each framework app.

Requester Info
Joseph Hickey, Vantage Systems, Inc.

@jphickey jphickey self-assigned this Sep 13, 2021
@jphickey jphickey added the enhancement New feature or request label Sep 13, 2021
jphickey added a commit to jphickey/sch_lab that referenced this issue Sep 13, 2021
Whenever an integer value is used as a CFE_SB_MsgId_t, it should go through
the explicit conversion using the supplied inline function.
astrogeco added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 21, 2021
Fix #90, apply CFE_SB_ValueToMsgId where required
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
1 participant