[fpc-devel] Arm Thumb2 - Stellaris status

John Clymer john at johnclymer.net
Sat Aug 20 08:20:45 CEST 2011

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.

OR - we could leave the peripheral definitions to the user.  (Which I'm assuming 
is not the preferred route.)


From: Florian Klämpfl <florian at freepascal.org>
To: FPC developers' list <fpc-devel at 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 at lists.freepascal.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freepascal.org/pipermail/fpc-devel/attachments/20110819/3d2b93c7/attachment.html>

More information about the fpc-devel mailing list