On 20 Aug 2011, at 07:20, John Clymer wrote: > Also, just peeked at current line up of STM32 controllers, there are 150 > different controllers available, consisting of 33 possible combinations of > FLASH memory and SRAM size. > > I will try to get the controller specific parts boiled up into record > structures this weekend, and get some added controllers installed into > cpuinfo.pas. (And fix any compiler breakages from the change.) I have the > SVN download - so generated diffs should be a bit easier (still learning SVN > though...) > > Also, I read through the ARM docs regarding the "standard" library - and can > setup registers based on the each vendors published "C" library so they match > the ARM/vendor docs. However, as each controller in the line-up has only > certain peripherals, is it the intention that EACH controller gets it's own > controller file with memory definitions for peripherals ? That's 300+ unit > files between STM32 and TI's Stellaris line-ups. > > OR - does one try to merge as many controllers into 1 memory definition as > possible. i.e. ALL of stellaris could be defined for the maximal > configuration of peripherals (as they have a standard mapping layout for > peripherals i.e. ALL LM3 devices have UART0 at the exact same location - and > all have the same register layout.) The caveat to this that one could > compile code that won't actually run on a given device. >
I think that anybody using a device would have to have already assigned pin connections in the board design and should know well which peripherals they are using. > OR - we could leave the peripheral definitions to the user. (Which I'm > assuming is not the preferred route.) It is to me. People can contribute definitions and drivers as they use the parts and these can just go in 'uses'. Geoffrey > > John > > From: Florian Klämpfl <flor...@freepascal.org> > To: FPC developers' list <fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org> > Sent: Fri, August 19, 2011 12:19:05 PM > Subject: Re: [fpc-devel] Arm Thumb2 - Stellaris status > > Am 19.08.2011 05:28, schrieb John Clymer: > > Currently, everything is in a handful of giant arrays. Just wondering > > if it would be better to switch to a record structure for the controller > > entries - rather than individual arrays. (Add in a variety of STM parts > > and the other manufacturers, and there could easily be over 100 memory > > configurations in the table.) > > Maybe it's indeed better to have an array of records, each record > describing one controller. > > > > > My suggestion would be that the register definitions come in an UNIT > > file that only defines registers. The controller unit in the compiler > > source would only provide the bare minimum necessary to bring the system > > up and call PASCALMAIN. However, if it is deemed better to have the > > entire register set defined inside the RTL - that would be fine too. > > Well, isn't it for a user easier just to pass the controller he uses on > the command line and the compiler does the rest? Why bother with > addional uses etc. if the compiler knows already anything? > _______________________________________________ > fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org > http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel > _______________________________________________ > fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org > http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
_______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
