Code size report:

   bare-arm:    +0 +0.000% 
minimal x86:    +0 +0.000% 
   unix x64:    +0 +0.000% standard
      stm32:    +0 +0.000% PYBV10
     mimxrt:    +0 +0.000% TEENSY40
        rp2:    +0 +0.000% RPI_PICO
       samd:    +0 +0.000% ADAFRUIT_ITSYBITSY_M4_EXPRESS

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (f93ffc2) 98.36% compared to head (3b78b37) 98.36%.

❗ Current head 3b78b37 differs from pull request most recent head 51fbec2. Consider uploading reports for the commit 51fbec2 to get more accurate results

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master   #13468   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   98.36%   98.36%           
=======================================
  Files         159      159           
  Lines       21088    21088           
=======================================
  Hits        20743    20743           
  Misses        345      345           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

This looks good!

Just wondering though... is there any reason why we can't do ports/* rather than port_*? (i.e. mirror the way the top-level ports dir is structured).

is there any reason why we can't do ports/* rather than port_*?

Because there were no nested directories in tests/ and I didn't want to start doing that (nested dirs). But that's a pretty weak reason, and it would be neater for tests to match the top-level dir structure.

I will change it to nested dirs.