[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] arm: Add nRF51 SoC and micro:bit machine

From: Joel Stanley
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] arm: Add nRF51 SoC and micro:bit machine
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2018 00:05:14 +0930

On 3 May 2018 at 18:54, Peter Maydell <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 3 May 2018 at 10:05, Joel Stanley <address@hidden> wrote:
>> Hello,
>> This short series implements a minimal definition of the Nordic
>> Semiconductor nRF51, a Cortex-M0 ARM SoC, and the BBC micro:bit, a
>> machine that will use this SoC.
>> This work will serve as the base for our Google Summer of Code and
>> Outreachy interns who will work on implementing a number of features on
>> top of this base.
>> I've tested this with a microbit micropython firmware, and checked that
>> it starts running by looking at it with gdb.
>> I chose to keep the nrf51 and the microbit seperate, to not confuse the
>> peripherals that are on the microbit but are not part of the nrf51, and
>> vice versa.
>> Please review!
> Hi; thanks for this patchset. I've done some quick overview review.
> It looks broadly ok but there are some details which don't follow
> our current preferences/practices for board and SoC models (we have
> a lot of legacy code in the codebase that follows older approaches
> or is just buggy, so it can be hard to get those right. The mps2
> boards and the iotkit SoC are the most recent I've written so
> probably not a bad pattern to look at.)

Thanks for taking a look. It's taken a while for me to get back to
this, but I've got a v2 on it's way.

I got a bit lost in the mps2, with the different variants and such.
I've had a stab at fixing the specifics that you suggested, but I
might need some more advice there.



> We should probably not put this into master until we've got at least
> the cortex-m0 model, though.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]