Skip to content

Add support for ubirch boards #4315

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 8 commits into from
May 26, 2017
Merged

Conversation

theotherjimmy
Copy link
Contributor

@theotherjimmy theotherjimmy commented May 12, 2017

Taken from the original PR:

Description

Add support for our ubirch boards. UBRIDGE is a board with a K82F, GSM modem and some other parts that is programmed via USB (using an adapter board based on a K20DX). USENSE is a small form factor low-power sensor module with a KL82z MCU and sub-1GHz RF.

The changes include a fix in the debug uart settings, allowing for boards without external oscillator. It also enables the TRNG in the K_82 MCU for mbed.

Status

IN DEVELOPMENT

Migrations

NO

Todos

  • Tests

cc @thinkberg @0xc0170

I accidentally closed the old PR. Whoops.

thinkberg added 7 commits May 12, 2017 15:13
fix lpuart clock source settings, retrieve clock frequency accordingly
mbed kinetis low power modes

mbed kinetis low power modes
add usense support

add usense support
fixed clock config, fixed UART pins

fixed clock config, fixed UART pins

fixed clock config, fixed UART pins
fix ubridge and usense target
@theotherjimmy theotherjimmy mentioned this pull request May 12, 2017
2 tasks
@theotherjimmy theotherjimmy changed the title ## Description Add support for our ubirch boards. UBRIDGE is a board with a K82F, GSM modem and some other parts that is programmed via USB (using an adapter board based on a K20DX). USENSE is a small form factor low-power sensor module with a KL82z MCU and sub-1GHz RF. Add support for our ubirch boards May 12, 2017
@theotherjimmy
Copy link
Contributor Author

/morph test

@theotherjimmy theotherjimmy changed the title Add support for our ubirch boards Add support for ubirch boards May 12, 2017
@thinkberg
Copy link
Contributor

looks good.

@theotherjimmy
Copy link
Contributor Author

Awesome. Thanks!

@mbed-bot
Copy link

Result: SUCCESS

Your command has finished executing! Here's what you wrote!

/morph test

Output

mbed Build Number: 206

All builds and test passed!

@@ -534,10 +534,21 @@
"is_disk_virtual": true,
"inherits": ["Target"],
"detect_code": ["0218"],
"device_has": ["ANALOGIN", "ANALOGOUT", "ERROR_RED", "I2C", "I2CSLAVE", "INTERRUPTIN", "PORTIN", "PORTINOUT", "PORTOUT", "PWMOUT", "RTC", "SEMIHOST", "SERIAL", "SLEEP", "SPI", "SPISLAVE", "STDIO_MESSAGES"],
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

are we having 2 KL82Z boards, one one K82Z ? Why that duplication in the case of KL82Z ? There could be one MCU target , the 2 targets would inherit the all definitions from its parent?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

That would be an option I guess, the difference is mainly pinout of the actual board. The same applies to the K82F.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Agreed. @0xc0170 I'll make this use target inheritance instead. @thinkberg I'm going to add another commit to the series. If you think I should remove it, I can do so.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks ! Be careful though KL82Z is actually a board not MCU (at least that is what I noticed in targets.json), thus there should be MCU KL82Z and MCU K82F ?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

True, but the directories are not yet setup like that. If we can get NXP on the horn, we could do a general refactor of these targets.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@theotherjimmy happy with it as it is ?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes.

Copy link
Contributor

@thinkberg thinkberg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

How is an MCU differentiated from a board?

@@ -534,10 +534,21 @@
"is_disk_virtual": true,
"inherits": ["Target"],
"detect_code": ["0218"],
"device_has": ["ANALOGIN", "ANALOGOUT", "ERROR_RED", "I2C", "I2CSLAVE", "INTERRUPTIN", "PORTIN", "PORTINOUT", "PORTOUT", "PWMOUT", "RTC", "SEMIHOST", "SERIAL", "SLEEP", "SPI", "SPISLAVE", "STDIO_MESSAGES"],
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

That would be an option I guess, the difference is mainly pinout of the actual board. The same applies to the K82F.

@theotherjimmy
Copy link
Contributor Author

theotherjimmy commented May 15, 2017

Ah, whoops. I'm going to correct that commit. just a moment. I take it back. I don't know why the Cam-CI failed...

@theotherjimmy
Copy link
Contributor Author

The MCU would define the HAL, where as the board would define the pins associated with the board.

@theotherjimmy
Copy link
Contributor Author

I think the FRDM extra label adds the pins for the board on the KL82Z and the K82F.

@theotherjimmy
Copy link
Contributor Author

retest uvisor

1 similar comment
@0xc0170
Copy link
Contributor

0xc0170 commented May 16, 2017

retest uvisor

@0xc0170
Copy link
Contributor

0xc0170 commented May 17, 2017

/morph test

@mbed-bot
Copy link

Result: SUCCESS

Your command has finished executing! Here's what you wrote!

/morph test

Output

mbed Build Number: 245

All builds and test passed!

@theotherjimmy
Copy link
Contributor Author

@thinkberg Could you give us a link to where these boards are available?

@adbridge
Copy link
Contributor

@theotherjimmy @0xc0170 are you guys happy with this now?

@sg- sg- merged commit 049402c into ARMmbed:master May 26, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants