Make the 4th argument work in sinv

WenyuanShao commented 6 years ago

Summary of this Pull Request (PR)

This PR is trying to bring the 4th argument back in the sinv.

Intent for your PR

Choose one (Mandatory):

[ ] This PR is for a code-review and is intended to get feedback, but not to be pulled yet.
[x] This PR is mature, and ready to be integrated into the repo.

Reviewers (Mandatory):

@gparmer , @hungry-foolish , @phanikishoreg

Code Quality

As part of this pull request, I've considered the following:

Style:

[x] Comments adhere to the Style Guide (SG)
[x] Spacing adhere's to the SG
[x] Naming adhere's to the SG
[x] All other aspects of the SG are adhered to, or exceptions are justified in this pull request
[ ] I have run the auto formatter on my code before submitting this PR (see doc/auto_formatter.md for instructions)

Code Craftsmanship:

[x] I've made an attempt to remove all redundant code
[x] I've considered ways in which my changes might impact existing code, and cleaned it up
[x] I've formatted the code in an effort to make it easier to read (proper error handling, function use, etc...)
[x] I've commented appropriately where code is tricky
[x] I agree that there is no "throw-away" code, and that code in this PR is of high quality

Testing

I've tested the code using the following test programs (provide list here): I have ran llbooter_pong.sh, llbooter_test.sh, micro_boot.sh, unit_schedcomp.sh and unit_schedtests.sh.

gparmer commented 6 years ago

Looks fine to me. @phanikishoreg ?

phanikishoreg commented 6 years ago

@gparmer Looks good to me.

@WenyuanShao Really appreciate making a PR for this fix.

These are changes manually merged up from my commit here, right? https://github.com/gwsystems/composite/commit/e09e0cedf1af23a1503275a6200ee165c9dee826

Would have been great if you referenced that commit in some way, perhaps in the commit message. ;-) Anyway!

WenyuanShao commented 6 years ago

@phanikishoreg sorry about that, I will make another git commit and include the reference today.

phanikishoreg commented 6 years ago

It is fine. That is perhaps not necessary. We can just reference the origin of changes in the PR message this time.

Another unrelated observation: Is it Github that is messing up your commit story in the PR? It seems to show a lot of commits that are not part of this PR but are part of another PR you've pending??

WenyuanShao commented 6 years ago

@phanikishoreg You are right. I think it is because I create a new branch after all of my commits and github copied my code from the other branch to the new one. I shall fix it.

gwsystems / composite