FreeRTOS / FreeRTOS-Kernel

FreeRTOS kernel files only, submoduled into https://github.com/FreeRTOS/FreeRTOS and various other repos.
https://www.FreeRTOS.org
MIT License
2.62k stars 1.09k forks source link

Assign idle task to each core before the SMP scheduler start #945

Closed chinglee-iot closed 7 months ago

chinglee-iot commented 7 months ago

Description

All the cores start with idle tasks before the SMP scheduler is running.

In this PR:

Test Steps

N/A

Checklist:

Related Issue

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.

codecov[bot] commented 7 months ago

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Comparison is base (460e953) 93.43% compared to head (701289d) 93.42%.

Additional details and impacted files ```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## main #945 +/- ## ========================================== - Coverage 93.43% 93.42% -0.01% ========================================== Files 6 6 Lines 3199 3195 -4 Branches 890 887 -3 ========================================== - Hits 2989 2985 -4 Misses 103 103 Partials 107 107 ``` | [Flag](https://app.codecov.io/gh/FreeRTOS/FreeRTOS-Kernel/pull/945/flags?src=pr&el=flags&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=FreeRTOS) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [unittests](https://app.codecov.io/gh/FreeRTOS/FreeRTOS-Kernel/pull/945/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=FreeRTOS) | `93.42% <100.00%> (-0.01%)` | :arrow_down: | Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. [Click here](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/carryforward-flags?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=FreeRTOS#carryforward-flags-in-the-pull-request-comment) to find out more.

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

sonarcloud[bot] commented 7 months ago

Quality Gate Passed Quality Gate passed

The SonarCloud Quality Gate passed, but some issues were introduced.

1 New issue
0 Security Hotspots
No data about Coverage
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud