On 01/25/2012 06:54 PM, Freddie Chopin wrote: > W dniu 2012-01-24 22:36, Andreas Fritiofson pisze: >> It's fairly simple to replace the few instructions in stm32f1x.S that >> are unavailable on the M0, with their equivalent multi-instruction >> sequence. In fact I just did this, will try flashing the M3 and post to >> gerrit soon if it works. I also caught a small bug in my assembler code, >> so I had to fix that anyway. The performance penalty of limiting the >> stm32f1x flash loader to M0 instructions should be insignificant. > I don't think that is a good idea? Why Cortex-M0 could not have it's own > loader? Why maintain two separate loader versions if they are quite similar, and the M0-Loader will work on M3 systems?
Having separate, nearly duplicate code is only warranted if there is some real performance gain from this. cu Michael ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-d2d _______________________________________________ OpenOCD-devel mailing list OpenOCD-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openocd-devel