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

feat: allow Sticky LS state to persist across EM or optionally across reboot #4978

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Jun 2, 2024

Conversation

philmoz
Copy link
Collaborator

@philmoz philmoz commented May 7, 2024

Persistence across EM is useful when recovering model state.

Not sure whether persistence on reboot is a good idea or not - opinions?

@3djc
Copy link
Collaborator

3djc commented May 7, 2024

Persistence on EM makes a lot of sense, but I believe not at all on reboot imho.

@pfeerick
Copy link
Member

pfeerick commented May 7, 2024

On EM, definitely. Across reboot... only as an option. There are times where the LS being able to remember it's state (just like with customisable switches) would be advantageous.

@3djc
Copy link
Collaborator

3djc commented May 7, 2024

Could you describe such a scenario?

@pfeerick
Copy link
Member

pfeerick commented May 7, 2024

For the same reason as with customisable switches... when using momentary switches as 2POS, and remembering the state across reboots.

@3djc
Copy link
Collaborator

3djc commented May 7, 2024

That works for customizable switches because they have a led to indicate the state. Bad idea for LS I think

@pfeerick
Copy link
Member

pfeerick commented May 7, 2024

Even as an option, rather than the default? 🤔 So what happens when I use a SF to adjust a GV to get that persistence? Is that not dangerous also (with more steps, and loss of both SFs and GVs in the process).

@philmoz
Copy link
Collaborator Author

philmoz commented May 7, 2024

I've added an option flag so users can decide if a Sticky LS should persist across reboots.

@philmoz philmoz force-pushed the persist-sticky-ls branch 2 times, most recently from b400aae to 83524b1 Compare May 14, 2024 06:32
@pfeerick pfeerick added this to the 2.11 milestone May 14, 2024
@philmoz philmoz force-pushed the persist-sticky-ls branch 2 times, most recently from 590c028 to 04de7a9 Compare May 21, 2024 09:13
@inventor7777
Copy link

Is it at all feasible to add an option like this to the actual LS menu? With all the other options? So you can choose for individual STKY actions. Just throwing that out there (or maybe that’s what this is about and I just can’t interpret the code changed 😂)

@pfeerick pfeerick self-requested a review June 2, 2024 02:10
@pfeerick pfeerick changed the title feat(radio): allow state of Sticky LS to persist across reboot or EM. feat(radio): allow Sticky LS state to persist across EM or optionally across reboot Jun 2, 2024
@pfeerick pfeerick changed the title feat(radio): allow Sticky LS state to persist across EM or optionally across reboot feat: allow Sticky LS state to persist across EM or optionally across reboot Jun 2, 2024
@pfeerick pfeerick added the enhancement ✨ New feature or request label Jun 2, 2024
@pfeerick
Copy link
Member

pfeerick commented Jun 2, 2024

LGTM on TX16S and TX12, and read/write to TX12 with companion fine. Simulator for X9D+2019 looks good also...

@pfeerick
Copy link
Member

pfeerick commented Jun 2, 2024

Is it at all feasible to add an option like this to the actual LS menu? With all the other options? So you can choose for individual STKY actions. Just throwing that out there (or maybe that’s what this is about and I just can’t interpret the code changed 😂)

Not quite sure what you mean... this adds this as an option to all sticky functions... i.e. you have the option to make the state persistent across reboots.

@pfeerick pfeerick merged commit b165248 into EdgeTX:main Jun 2, 2024
47 checks passed
@inventor7777
Copy link

Not quite sure what you mean... this adds this as an option to all sticky functions... i.e. you have the option to make the state persistent across reboots.

After testing it on my radio, I now realize that that was the whole purpose, but I just didn't pay enough attention to the new code 😂

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
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants