Thanks Matteo :-) My response as on GH :-)
In this approach looks like we need to fix the boards where -1 (new default) is used, just to pass build here and have correct timings on these boards, then update the rest of the boards depending on what we have at hand to fix their timings? :-) On the other hand we may keep this default and put some pressure / attention to the proper timings calibration when using different boards. I am wondering what impacts the value and if the differences are big - is it build specific? For instance when using different compiler, specific optimization level, many irqs, threads, etc. Or this value is always correct once set no matter what build and configuration is used? :-) I mean this 5000 default was probably set because any default may be wrong when this value is not calibrated on a final firmware build? People just did not know that (including me to be honest but I usually change that value just not very precise measurement)? In that case we may leave as-is and just add Pre-Flight-Check-List to the documentation with list of important things to know / check / verify when creating / building NuttX based projects? :-) Anyways this Pre-Flight-Check-List may be a nice a nice to add to the documentation, it can be a table or bullet points with just short sentence reminders on what is important before firmware launch? Each reminder would be a hyperlink to a detailed description if someone sees it for the first time? What do you think folks? :-) Thanks! :-) Tomek On Fri, Sep 12, 2025 at 8:38 PM Matteo Golin <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > I have proposed a change wherein the default value > for CONFIG_BOARD_LOOPSPERMSEC is no longer "5000" but instead "-1", such > that it throws a compilation error if not changed. > > This is because most users do not know about this configuration value, and > wildly incorrect values may cause subtle timing issues. > > You can find the linked issue here: > https://github.com/apache/nuttx/issues/17004 > And the PR I made here: https://github.com/apache/nuttx/pull/17011 > > I need people with targets that are using the default to help us determine > the correct value with the `calib_udelay` example so that we can fix > failing builds and make NuttX more stable for users using the pre-made > defconfigs. > > Let me know what you think, > Matteo -- CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info
