> On 05 Jun 2015, at 00:19, Peter Maydell wrote:
>
> ... systick should be fairly small and self contained.
>
> ... My strong initial impression is that we should do this by having
> the CPU object expose a MemoryRegion, which you can then map
> over the right range in the NVIC. I don't think i
On 4 June 2015 at 19:17, Liviu Ionescu wrote:
>
>> On 04 Jun 2015, at 16:03, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>
>> ... Splitting out Systick definitely makes sense.
>
> as a first step, I would try to define a separate object (armv7m-systick) and
> copy/paste the access code.
>
> then refer it inside the e
> On 04 Jun 2015, at 16:03, Peter Maydell wrote:
>
> ... Splitting out Systick definitely makes sense.
as a first step, I would try to define a separate object (armv7m-systick) and
copy/paste the access code.
then refer it inside the existing NVIC, to avoid affecting existing
functionality.
On 4 June 2015 at 13:45, Liviu Ionescu wrote:
> while working on the Cortex-M framework, I noticed that the current
> armv7m_nvic implementation is a bit old, and, to my opinion, not
> very fortunately structured.
>
> first, it is named NVIC, but implements not only the NVIC registers,
> but some
while working on the Cortex-M framework, I noticed that the current armv7m_nvic
implementation is a bit old, and, to my opinion, not very fortunately
structured.
first, it is named NVIC, but implements not only the NVIC registers, but some
other register groups, like SysTick, system control, so
