This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

How do you submit a bug report on TivaWare? When is TivaWare 1.1 set for release?

Working with another community member, a defect was found in TivaWare 1.0.  How do you submit a defect report?

Please see thread: "SysCtlClockSet not working for some parameters in TivaWare 1.0" for the specific defect.

  • Looking at the TivaWare documentation and http://www.ti.com/tool/sw-tm4c I can't see any web form / email address specificially to send TivaWare feedback to.

    Perhaps use the Microcontrollers - Email Semiconductor Technical Support form?

  • You can report TivaWare bugs via this forum. It's monitored by the TivaWare developers and application support engineers (i.e. the people who write all the software). If and when we see any bug reports, we enter them into our bug tracking system for attention in the next release. If I'm the one seeing the report, I usually post the fact that I've recorded an issue but others may not.

  • Dave Wilson said:
    I usually post the fact that I've recorded an issue but others may not.

    And - many here can confirm your posts.  (they do comfort)

    Seems most helpful to your firm to encourage such bug alerts/postings - and allowing support cohorts to remain "silent" - seems, "less than ideal."  (i.e. lack of acknowledgement is likely to "dull" such postings - not seeing company "flag/ACK" suggests, "do not entirely care...") 

  • Indeed. Actually, this exchange has illustrated another problem in the way we handle the forums. In this particular instance, no TI person had seen the report because the forum thread was marked "Answered" before they got to it. When responsible for forums, typically we don't pay much attention to answered questions. I've just sent around a public service announcement to all the folks who take turns on the forums asking them to make sure they read all threads on their assigned day, even if they are apparently closed already. Hopefully that will prevent this kind of thing from slipping through the net in future.

  • If you'll allow - myself/others here know your instincts and work ethic to be superb.  That said/acknowledged - doubt that, "no TI person had seen the report..." can hold true - and speaks "volumes" - should that be the unfortunate case. 

    Post was a multiply accessed/updated, "Bug Report" - impacting the heralded, new release - surely others should exhibit some curiosity - at minimum...  (I know many on our staff - read, considered and reacted...)

    Allowing the acknowledgement of "Bug Reports" to be "arbitrary/optional" - may not be optimal management policy.  Is not unit cohesiveness - and consistency - of great value?  Alerting all others to "read everything" - w/out strongly suggesting that Bug Reports be formally acknowledged - may be second best.  (and - you may blame me as the "heavy."  {not the first time})

    Some here do care and value this "best in class" forum - my intent is to react when, "normal/customary" business/management procedures seem not to have properly, "bubbled up."

    Update: moments ago - was honored w/Verify Answerhttp://e2e.ti.com/support/microcontrollers/tiva_arm/f/908/t/271333.aspx

    Disturbing as vendor's present policy (reported - post above) insures that no vendor reader will learn - potentially benefit - from success of others!  Instead of avoiding - our group always gravitates to such "Verified" posts - seeking to expand our understanding/competency.

    Can this, "disregard when green" - if indeed a formal policy - be at all good - or in any way proper? 

    And...often forum owner reminds, "Search the forum for similar - do not create a duplicate issue!"  Thus - further detail or new discovery may "land" upon past post - and that thread may have been past verified.  Thus - if the, "disregard when green" stands - any/all new discoveries/issues/updates are guaranteed to be, "missed/lost!"

    Might this be a policy in some need of review - deeper consideration?