No, no need to do that as I am currently modifying the spi hal so that we dont have license issues with the nordic SDK. I will commit changes to the syscfg.yml files when I do this.
Will > On Nov 18, 2016, at 4:09 AM, Kevin Townsend <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 17/11/16 05:15, will sanfilippo wrote: >> There is an easy way to prevent this as well which should be added to >> syscfg.yml. The following works: >> >> SPI_0_MASTER: >> description: 'SPI 0 master' >> value: 1 >> restrictions: >> - "!SPI_0_SLAVE" >> SPI_0_SLAVE: >> description: 'SPI 0 slave' >> value: 1 >> restrictions: >> - "!SPI_0_MASTER" >> The newt tool generates a nice error message: >> >> Error: Syscfg restriction violations detected: >> SPI_0_MASTER=1 requires SPI_0_SLAVE not be set, but SPI_0_SLAVE=1 >> SPI_0_SLAVE=1 requires SPI_0_MASTER not be set, but SPI_0_MASTER=1 >> >> Setting history (newest -> oldest): >> SPI_0_MASTER: [hw/bsp/nrf52dk:1] >> SPI_0_SLAVE: [hw/bsp/nrf52dk:1] > > I wasn't aware of the restrictions flag, that's nice to know about. > > Should I submit a pull request to resolve the conflict in master, though (for > at least the nRF52DK, I haven' t checked the other BSP packages)? > > I'd propose only enabling SPI_0_MASTER by default, but I'm perhaps missing > some specific intentions with this as well (having both MASTER and SLAVE > enabled in the BSP). > >
