On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 5:17 PM Alexandre IOOSS <erdn...@crans.org> wrote: > > On 6/14/21 5:52 PM, Peter Maydell wrote: > > On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 at 17:10, Alexandre Iooss <erdn...@crans.org> wrote: > >> > >> This is a Cortex-M3 based machine. Information can be found at: > >> https://www.st.com/en/evaluation-tools/stm32vldiscovery.html > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Iooss <erdn...@crans.org> > > > > The commit message says this is Cortex-M3 based, but the > > code gives it a Cortex-M4. Which is correct? > > This is an typo. The board is Cortex-M3 so I will fix the machine code > in next version of this patchset. > > >> --- > >> MAINTAINERS | 6 +++ > >> default-configs/devices/arm-softmmu.mak | 1 + > >> hw/arm/Kconfig | 4 ++ > >> hw/arm/meson.build | 1 + > >> hw/arm/stm32vldiscovery.c | 66 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> 5 files changed, 78 insertions(+) > >> create mode 100644 hw/arm/stm32vldiscovery.c > > > > Could you add some documentation for the new board, please? > > This lives in docs/system/arm. Commit c9f8511ea8d2b807 gives > > an example of adding docs for a board. > > > > thanks > > -- PMM > > > > Should I rather: > 1. Add `docs/system/arm/stm32vldiscovery.rst` to document only this new > machine? > 2. Add `docs/system/arm/stm32discovery.rst` to document this new machine > and future STM32 Discovery boards? > 3. Add `docs/system/arm/stm32.rst` to document all STM32-based boards? > > STM32 boards share a lot in common so I believe option 3 is more > appropriate, what is your opinion? > If we go with option 3, I can also try to document the Netduino Plus 2 > (maybe in another commit, or another patchset later).
Looking at the existing `nuvoton.rst` file I would say option 3 is the best bet here. Alistair > > Thanks, > -- Alexandre >
