[ECOS]Port to ARM9 STR9 uC

[ECOS]Port to ARM9 STR9 uC

[jerzy dyrda]

Hello all,

Announcing of other ARM9 port remember me that I should do it in the same way 
i.e. Now I'm developing port to ARM9 STR9 uC -> 
http://www.st.com/mcu/modules.php?name=mcu&file=devicedocs&DEV=STR912FAW44&FAM=101
but as a reference board I use such board MMstr912 -> 
http://www.propox.com/products/t_163.html ( due to fact of lacking original 
ST development board but this board is very close to "original").

Current status of project is :
- HAL
- RTC - wallclock
- watchdog
- serial driver 
- almost working ADC ;) - I still require info about triggering convertion
- SPI - in develop

BTW.
I looked on "Contributions and Development Projects" -> 
http://ecos.sourceware.org/contrib.html but I'm still confused
How can I register project ?

-- 
Miłego dnia / Best regards
Jerzy Dyrda

Re: [ECOS]Port to ARM9 STR9 uC

[jerzy dyrda]

Hi Daniel,

On Thursday 11 March 2010 19:13:44 Daniel Helgason wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-03-08 at 12:37 +0100, jerzy dyrda wrote:
> > Announcing of other ARM9 port remember me that I should do it in the same
> > way i.e. Now I'm developing port to ARM9 STR9 uC ->
> > http://www.st.com/mcu/modules.php?name=mcu&file=devicedocs&DEV=STR912FAW4
> >4&FAM=101 but as a reference board I use such board MMstr912 ->
> > http://www.propox.com/products/t_163.html ( due to fact of lacking
> > original ST development board but this board is very close to
> > "original"). ...
> Hi! Do you know if the STR9 shares same peripherals with the STR7
> devices?
After first look I can say some yes RTC, WDG and maybe TIM seem similar rest 
no. General feeling is that they didn't use any FIFO. 
Summarazing : I'm afaraid that differences between STR7 and STR9 are to big.

> I have some eCos code for the STR7 and a few dev boards. I have to admit
> it has been some time since I looked at it. I would be able help if you
> thought that was a good idea.
I very glad. I think any kind of help increase quality of software.
 
> With a little bit of planning maybe we could cover the whole family of
> chips and avoid the mess that is happening trying to get AT91SAM9 into
> the AT91SAM7 tree. 
I agree it's good time to think about structure of ST HAL's layer.
I implemented it in such manner :
Drivers :
devs/"type of driver"/arm/str9
and HAL
hal/arm/str9/ 
with to directories board dependent "mmstr912" and common for STR9 "var"
Every new development board will be located in hal/arm/str9/ with own name as 
it's doing for other hal implementation.

>At the very least, maybe you could keep in mind that
> somebody somewhere will want to add STR7 support and arrange your eCos
> port accordingly.
Maybe it should be created common stub  hal/arm/st"something"/var which 
provide hal function for STR9 and STR7 as well, platform dependent code as 
it's done i.e. "mmstr912". In turn drivers which are totally different  
should be separated e.g.
STR7
devs/"type of driver"/arm/str7
STR9
devs/"type of driver"/arm/str9

-- 
Miłego dnia / Best regards
Jerzy Dyrda