Skip to content

lib: add support for generic decode definitions #19

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 24, 2025

Conversation

psurply
Copy link
Contributor

@psurply psurply commented Mar 20, 2025

This allows the decode engine to look at the following path whenever a specific revision of the decode definitions could not be found:

P/V/S/S/crashlog/decode-defs/RECORD_TYPE/all/layout.csv

This change does not impact records that use type6 header.

@psurply psurply force-pushed the dev/generic_decode_defs branch 2 times, most recently from 3567ceb to 26398c3 Compare March 20, 2025 18:08
This allows the decode engine to look at the following path whenever a
specific revision of the decode definitions could not be found:

    P/V/S/S/crashlog/decode-defs/RECORD_TYPE/all/layout.csv

This change does not impact records that use type6 header.

Signed-off-by: Surply, Pierre <pierre.surply@intel.com>
@psurply psurply force-pushed the dev/generic_decode_defs branch from 26398c3 to 51477fc Compare March 21, 2025 10:17
@psurply psurply marked this pull request as ready for review March 21, 2025 10:18
@psurply psurply requested a review from jlrivasp March 21, 2025 10:18
Copy link
Contributor

@jlrivasp jlrivasp left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks a lot for the PR, it looks good to me

@jlrivasp jlrivasp merged commit 4644071 into intel:main Mar 24, 2025
5 checks passed
@psurply psurply deleted the dev/generic_decode_defs branch June 12, 2025 21:33
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants