[esp32] Document freertos_in_iram advanced option #5693
+13
−0
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
16 tasks
✅ Deploy Preview for esphome ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description:
Document the new
freertos_in_iramadvanced configuration option for ESP32.This option allows users to control whether FreeRTOS functions are placed in IRAM or flash. By default, non-ISR FreeRTOS functions are now placed in flash to save up to 8 KB of IRAM. Testing on ESP-IDF 5.5 with Bluetooth proxies shows no performance difference thanks to fast XIP (execute in place) from flash.
This change prepares for ESP-IDF 6.0 where this becomes the default behavior and
CONFIG_FREERTOS_PLACE_FUNCTIONS_INTO_FLASHis removed entirely.Related issue (if applicable): fixes espressif/esp-idf#17052
Pull request in esphome with YAML changes (if applicable):
Checklist:
I am merging into
nextbecause this is new documentation that has a matching pull-request in esphome as linked above.or
I am merging into
currentbecause this is a fix, change and/or adjustment in the current documentation and is not for a new component or feature.Link added in
/components/index.rstwhen creating new documents for new components or cookbook.