-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 917
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
Fix handling of custom configuration with 8 motors, enabling motor testing on octocopters #4213
Conversation
✅ Deploy Preview for origin-betaflight-app ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration. |
Co-authored-by: Mark Haslinghuis <[email protected]>
@limonspb , please check. although it obviously works, i feel it might should be part of the loop or may need to be set with some if/then statement. |
Quality Gate passedIssues Measures |
@Patronics did you check if it works ok and/or for standard mixers, and also for motor remapping and motor order dialogs, please? |
@limonspb already tested - this just fixes the assumption made in #2436 See #4213 (comment) |
I've tested the standard mixers, they all seem to behave properly, with one exception, which seems to not quite behave properly before this change either, so seems to be an unrelated bug? When I tried setting the "Singlecopter" mixer, after a reboot it always seems to be set to the custom mixer instead of singlecopter, and from there it seems to persist whatever motor configuration was added in custom, rather than using the singlecopter mixer? But again the same broken behavior is observed with the released version of betaflight configurator 10.10.0, so I don't believe the issue is related to this PR. It seems to have been documented in the issue betaflight/betaflight#10641, so already a known behavior. |
@Patronics see betaflight/betaflight#10641 (comment) why that happens. |
…sting on octocopters (betaflight#4213) * Fix handling of custom configuration with 8 motors Resolves issue betaflight#4212 * minor optimization since same check is done in for loop above * Formatting tweak for comment Co-authored-by: Mark Haslinghuis <[email protected]> * substitute in equivalent but cleaner logic --------- Co-authored-by: Mark Haslinghuis <[email protected]>
Resolves issue #4212