Skip to content

Update QSPI porting guide #676

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Aug 30, 2018

Conversation

maciejbocianski
Copy link
Contributor

Align docs with changes introduced in:
ARMmbed/mbed-os#7817
ARMmbed/mbed-os#7783

@@ -53,4 +75,8 @@ To enable the QSPI HAL, define `QSPI` in the targets.json file inside `device_ha

### Testing

To be implemented
The Mbed OS HAL provides a set of conformance tests for the QSPI interface (**Note: QSPI HAL tests require onboard QSPI flash memory**). You can use these tests to validate the correctness of your implementation. To run the QSPI HAL tests, use the following command:
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Note: QSPI HAL tests require onboard QSPI flash memory

I would say it's still a valid use case to support QSPI even if the board doesn't have on board qspi flash. Could we only run the test requiring onboard flash if the QSPI_FLASH1_xxx are defined? @donatieng @jamesbeyond

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@bulislaw Actually QSPI test is run only on targets defining DEVICE_QSPI.
Currently DEVICE_QSPI means device with onboard flash, so we don't recognize QSPI capable devices without onboard QSPI flash. I think that it would be good to have something like: DEVICE_QSPI and DEVICE_QSPI_FLASH to distinguish them.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why do we only consider devices with onboard flash? Not every SPI device has SPI memory attached to it...

Copy link
Contributor Author

@maciejbocianski maciejbocianski Aug 23, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Not every.
e.g. Nucleo-L496ZG has no QSPI flash but it has QSPI signals routed out on external connector according circuit diagram (waiting for STM confirmation on it in ARMmbed/mbed-os#7817)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would say it's still a valid use case to support QSPI even if the board doesn't have on board qspi flash. Could we only run the test requiring onboard flash if the QSPI_FLASH1_xxx are defined? @donatieng @jamesbeyond

👍 Wording would be "requires QSPI FLASH pins to be defined" ? Targets with onboard flash would have it by default, others would need a config to add them.

Copy link
Contributor

@kegilbert kegilbert left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Changes LGTM, have a few minor nits with other sections on this page I'll address in a separate PR after this gets in.

@@ -29,6 +29,28 @@ To make sure your platform is ready for the upcoming changes, you need to implem

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Query: Can we delete or change the warning in line 7?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The code was merged it looks like, should be good to remove that warning,

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@AnotherButler warning was removed

Make minor formatting changes.
@AnotherButler
Copy link
Contributor

Have all comments been addressed?

@AnotherButler
Copy link
Contributor

FYI @MarceloSalazar @ashok-rao

Fix phrasing as requested in comments for accuracy.
@AnotherButler
Copy link
Contributor

@donatieng @0xc0170 Is this OK to merge?

@donatieng
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM 😄!

@AnotherButler AnotherButler merged commit 1e81863 into ARMmbed:development Aug 30, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants