Ledc check (IDFGH-14066)

[IhorNehrutsa]

Description

Related

Testing

---

Checklist

Before submitting a Pull Request, please ensure the following:

• 🚨 This PR does not introduce breaking changes.
• All CI checks (GH Actions) pass.
• Documentation is updated as needed.
• Tests are updated or added as necessary.
• Code is well-commented, especially in complex areas.
• Git history is clean — commits are squashed to the minimum necessary.

[CLAassistant]

Thank you for your submission! We really appreciate it. Like many open source projects, we ask that you all sign our Contributor License Agreement before we can accept your contribution.
1 out of 21 committers have signed the CLA.

✅ IhorNehrutsa
❌ igrr
❌ dobairoland
❌ mahavirj
❌ Isl2017
❌ suda-morris
❌ mythbuster5
❌ rahult-github
❌ jack0c
❌ ginkgm
❌ fhrbata
❌ zwx1995esp
❌ Harshal5
❌ ESP-Marius
❌ AdityaHPatwardhan
❌ esp-qing
❌ xiongweichao
❌ zhaoweiliang2021
❌ Icarus113
❌ esp-lrh
❌ esp-cjh
_{You have signed the CLA already but the status is still pending? Let us recheck it.}

[github-actions]

	Warnings
⚠️	Some issues found for the commit messages in this PR: the commit message " fix(bt): Update bt lib for ESP32-C3 and ESP32-S3(abd7733)": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "Apply 1 suggestion(s) to 1 file(s)": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "Apply 35 suggestion(s) to 1 file(s)": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "Merge branch 'fix/ble_mesh_24_76_v5.3' into 'release/v5.3'": probably contains Jira ticket reference (BLEMESH24-76). Please remove Jira tickets from commit messages. the commit message "change: exclude CVEs that do not impact ESP-IDF components": probably contains Jira ticket reference (CVE-2024, CVE-2024). Please remove Jira tickets from commit messages. the commit message "docs(ble): Revised the explanation for esp_bt_mem_release and esp_bt_controller_mem_release": summary appears to be too long the commit message "docs(ble):Added the parameter name data in esp_vhci_host_send_packet": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "examples/ledc_check.c: Check freq and duty.": summary should not end with a period (full stop) summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "feat(eth) configure eth mac using esp_read_mac": summary looks empty type/action looks empty the commit message "feat(psram): support APS3204L": summary looks too short the commit message "fix(wpa_supplicant):Deinit old dpp authentication data after receiving config.": summary should not end with a period (full stop) summary looks empty type/action looks empty Please fix these commit messages - here are some basic tips: follow Conventional Commits style correct format of commit message should be: <type/action>(<scope/component>): <summary>, for example fix(esp32): Fixed startup timeout issue allowed types are: change,ci,docs,feat,fix,refactor,remove,revert,test sufficiently descriptive message summary should be between 20 to 72 characters and start with upper case letter avoid Jira references in commit messages (unavailable/irrelevant for our customers) TIP: Install pre-commit hooks and run this check when committing (uses the Conventional Precommit Linter).
⚠️	Please consider squashing your 250 commits (simplifying branch history).

	Messages
📖	This PR seems to be quite large (total lines of code: 89388), you might consider splitting it into smaller PRs

👋 Hello IhorNehrutsa, we appreciate your contribution to this project!

---

📘 Please review the project's Contributions Guide for key guidelines on code, documentation, testing, and more.

---

🖊️ Please also make sure you have read and signed the Contributor License Agreement for this project.

---

Click to see more instructions ...

This automated output is generated by the PR linter DangerJS, which checks if your Pull Request meets the project's requirements and helps you fix potential issues.

DangerJS is triggered with each push event to a Pull Request and modify the contents of this comment.

Please consider the following:
- Danger mainly focuses on the PR structure and formatting and can't understand the meaning behind your code or changes.
- Danger is not a substitute for human code reviews; it's still important to request a code review from your colleagues.
- Resolve all warnings (⚠️ ) before requesting a review from human reviewers - they will appreciate it.
- Addressing info messages (📖) is strongly recommended; they're less critical but valuable.
- To manually retry these Danger checks, please navigate to the Actions tab and re-run last Danger workflow.

Review and merge process you can expect ...

We do welcome contributions in the form of bug reports, feature requests and pull requests via this public GitHub repository.

This GitHub project is public mirror of our internal git repository

1. An internal issue has been created for the PR, we assign it to the relevant engineer.
2. They review the PR and either approve it or ask you for changes or clarifications.
3. Once the GitHub PR is approved, we synchronize it into our internal git repository.
4. In the internal git repository we do the final review, collect approvals from core owners and make sure all the automated tests are passing.
- At this point we may do some adjustments to the proposed change, or extend it by adding tests or documentation.
5. If the change is approved and passes the tests it is merged into the default branch.
5. On next sync from the internal git repository merged change will appear in this public GitHub repository.

Generated by 🚫 dangerJS against 52031f2