Kalowsky, Daniel <daniel.kalowsky@...>
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
From: Nashif, Anas
Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2016 8:12 AM
To: Walsh, Benjamin (Wind River) <benjamin.walsh(a)windriver.com>
Cc: Brandewie, Dirk J <dirk.j.brandewie(a)intel.com>; Maciek Borzecki
<maciek.borzecki(a)gmail.com>; devel(a)lists.zephyrproject.org; Kalowsky,
Daniel <daniel.kalowsky(a)intel.com>; users(a)lists.zephyrproject.org
Subject: Re: [devel] Re: Re: Re: Re: STM32F103x port
On 2 Mar 2016, at 10:54, Benjamin Walsh<benjamin.walsh(a)windriver.com> wrote:
On Tue, Mar 01, 2016 at 10:17:17AM -0800, Dirk Brandewie wrote:
On 02/29/2016 02:26 PM, Kalowsky, Daniel wrote:
First suggestion, create an arch/arm/soc/stm32, and use the Kconfig
allow selecting of the various flavors of the STM32 chip. This would
be similar to what you've already got with the
The main issue with this is the fact that stm32 extends all the way from M0
Having thought about it for 10 seconds it seems reasonable :-) To the
I'm not opposed to this.
file, merged with the values from your Kconfig.soc. Then keeping theMakes sense. I think we should also add another 'MCU family' level of
Kconfig to the pieces generic to all the STM32 portions (i.e. flash
size, base address, etc).
hierarchy. We would have then:
Ben/Dirk any commentary?
greatest extent reasonable please avoid link time binding of SOC specifc
code into the generic stm32 code. We don't want to the next guy to
wonder which init() function is called.
to M7, in total set of 11 series
• STM32F0 Series
• STM32F1 Series
• STM32F2 Series
• STM32F3 Series
• STM32F4 Series
• STM32F7 Series
• STM32L0 Series
• STM32L1 Series
• STM32L4 Series
• STM32T Series
• STM32W Series
where each series can have up to 10 different SoCs in some cases.
I'm not sure I understand this comment. Is this a positive or negative to the proposed solution?