Enabling SPI ports on some nucleos #6172

tbursztyka · 2018-02-13T12:36:59Z

Hello,

While testing something on SPI that required to use stm32's, and since I had these nucleos, I enabled the SPI ports relevantly there.
I could successfully test nucleo_f103rb and nucleo_f334r8

@erwango My nucleo_f030r8 st-link acting weirdly as you know I could not test yet (I'll do you trick of using an external st-link). But I believe it should be fine. The only thing which I have a doubt about is the NSS pinmuxing: should it has a pull up?

erwango · 2018-02-13T12:39:56Z

@tbursztyka : You might want to rebase on #5883.
For nucleo_f030r8, I'll do the test

codecov-io · 2018-02-13T12:58:37Z

Codecov Report

Merging #6172 into master will decrease coverage by 0.29%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##           master    #6172     +/-   ##
=========================================
- Coverage   53.15%   52.86%   -0.3%     
=========================================
  Files         412      412             
  Lines       40139    40284    +145     
  Branches     7732     7802     +70     
=========================================
- Hits        21337    21296     -41     
- Misses      15667    15773    +106     
- Partials     3135     3215     +80

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
kernel/device.c	`55% <0%> (-35.48%)`	⬇️
tests/kernel/mem_slab/mslab/src/slab.c	`77.96% <0%> (-15.59%)`	⬇️
tests/kernel/workq/work_queue/src/main.c	`93.6% <0%> (-5.78%)`	⬇️
kernel/thread.c	`75.88% <0%> (-2.79%)`	⬇️
subsys/net/lib/app/init.c	`66.66% <0%> (-2.78%)`	⬇️
subsys/net/lib/app/server.c	`25.25% <0%> (-2.03%)`	⬇️
kernel/init.c	`74.07% <0%> (-1.37%)`	⬇️
kernel/work_q.c	`80% <0%> (-0.36%)`	⬇️
subsys/net/lib/app/net_app.c	`20.26% <0%> (-0.26%)`	⬇️
subsys/net/lib/app/client.c	`48.47% <0%> (-0.24%)`	⬇️
... and 50 more

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 76b262c...04b8505. Read the comment docs.

tbursztyka · 2018-02-13T13:06:56Z

@erwango thx, missed that pr. there is most probably redundant things then

ydamigos

@tbursztyka I will check it again when you rebase it on #5883.

ydamigos · 2018-02-13T14:31:47Z

dts/arm/st/stm32f1.dtsi

SPI3 is not available on stm32f103xb. You should move it inside stm32f103Xe.dtsi and stm32f107.dtsi.

dwagenk · 2018-02-14T07:57:32Z

dts/arm/st/stm32f0.dtsi

spi2 is not present on all f0 SoCs so it shouldn't be in this place.
I'd propse adding an stm32f030Xc.dtsi and a stm32f030X8.dtsi file and adding the node there.

I thought changing the status to "ok" in relevant board would be sufficient. (one that support only spi1, or both etc...), since the base address seems to be the same (well, as you noticed below: if f09x or f07x has spi2 support but with different base address then splitting in relevant files will be necessary)

there's been some discussion on this in #5883, eg this: #5883 (comment)

I did what you proposed yes

dwagenk · 2018-02-14T08:01:23Z

drivers/pinmux/stm32/pinmux_stm32f0.h

Haven't looked into it, but are they present on other f0 SoCs as well? f091, f072?

Maybe, I only looked at f030x specs. We can add support for f09x, f07x later

tbursztyka · 2018-02-14T08:51:32Z

Rebased on top of #5883 and updated : I removed 2 patches that were then unnecessary.

tbursztyka · 2018-02-16T07:20:05Z

recheck

dwagenk · 2018-02-16T07:27:38Z

@tbursztyka rebase on #5883 again. There were some CI problems solved yesterday by #6223

ydamigos

Right now, enabling SPIx port in dts is not enough. You should also enable SPIx ports in board's Kconfig.defconfig file for boards with STM32 SoC.

ydamigos · 2018-02-16T08:46:50Z

boards/arm/nucleo_f103rb/nucleo_f103rb.dts

You should also enable SPI_1 port in board's Kconfig.defconfig.

ydamigos · 2018-02-16T08:47:15Z

boards/arm/nucleo_f103rb/nucleo_f103rb.dts

ydamigos · 2018-02-16T08:47:54Z

boards/arm/nucleo_f030r8/nucleo_f030r8.dts

You should also enable SPI_1 port in board's Kconfig.defconfig.

ydamigos · 2018-02-16T08:48:06Z

boards/arm/nucleo_f030r8/nucleo_f030r8.dts

tbursztyka · 2018-02-16T09:41:01Z

@ydamigos I did not do it on purpose: why enabling a port by default if it's not in use? I'd rather let the user do that, depending on his need.

ydamigos · 2018-02-16T09:52:40Z

@tbursztyka The user might get confused to see them enabled in the dts file. For example, spi_loopback compiles fine but it won't work on the board.

tbursztyka · 2018-02-16T10:36:47Z

@ydamigos ok, well after users should know what they are doing so if they have unused spi port there, up to them to disable these. Will update

ydamigos · 2018-02-17T15:28:31Z

dts/arm/st/stm32f030X8.dtsi

As mentioned in #6238, SPI irq priority cannot be 5.

ydamigos · 2018-02-17T15:28:45Z

dts/arm/st/stm32f030Xc.dtsi

This feature is available on STM32F030x8 and STM32F030xC. Signed-off-by: Tomasz Bursztyka <[email protected]>

Other variants exist. Signed-off-by: Tomasz Bursztyka <[email protected]>

Current configuration was choosen to avoid colliding with existing ones for i2c and uart, but others can be used (see drivers/pinmux/stm32/stm32_f0.h) Signed-off-by: Tomasz Bursztyka <[email protected]>

Current configuration was choosen to avoid colliding with existing ones for i2c and uart, but others can be used. Signed-off-by: Tomasz Bursztyka <[email protected]>

tbursztyka · 2018-02-20T15:04:12Z

@ydamigos can you review it again? Sounds like it's good to go (hopefully)

Issues addressed

tbursztyka requested review from erwango, superna9999 and ydamigos February 13, 2018 12:36

tbursztyka changed the title ~~St spi on nucleos~~ Enabling SPI ports on some nucleos Feb 13, 2018

tbursztyka mentioned this pull request Feb 13, 2018

dts: spi: add more dts nodes and fixup defines, convert boards to using dts #5883

Merged

superna9999 approved these changes Feb 13, 2018

View reviewed changes

ydamigos requested changes Feb 13, 2018

View reviewed changes

dwagenk previously requested changes Feb 14, 2018

View reviewed changes

tbursztyka force-pushed the st_spi_on_nucleos branch from 7874721 to c89d938 Compare February 14, 2018 08:50

tbursztyka force-pushed the st_spi_on_nucleos branch 2 times, most recently from 0b764c5 to 5764db0 Compare February 15, 2018 07:34

tbursztyka force-pushed the st_spi_on_nucleos branch from 5764db0 to 9b674a7 Compare February 16, 2018 07:34

ydamigos requested changes Feb 16, 2018

View reviewed changes

tbursztyka force-pushed the st_spi_on_nucleos branch from 9b674a7 to c2922f1 Compare February 16, 2018 10:49

ydamigos requested changes Feb 17, 2018

View reviewed changes

tbursztyka force-pushed the st_spi_on_nucleos branch from c2922f1 to 133650c Compare February 19, 2018 09:23

Tomasz Bursztyka added 4 commits February 20, 2018 16:00

soc/stm32: Add DTS support for SPI port 2 on stm32f030 series

54cff2b

This feature is available on STM32F030x8 and STM32F030xC. Signed-off-by: Tomasz Bursztyka <[email protected]>

drivers/pinmux: Provide common SPI1/SPI2 configuration on stm32f0

f83582f

Other variants exist. Signed-off-by: Tomasz Bursztyka <[email protected]>

boards/arm: Enabling SPI ports on nucleo_f030r8

70b02bb

Current configuration was choosen to avoid colliding with existing ones for i2c and uart, but others can be used (see drivers/pinmux/stm32/stm32_f0.h) Signed-off-by: Tomasz Bursztyka <[email protected]>

boards/arm: Enabling SPI ports on nucleo_f103rb

04b8505

Current configuration was choosen to avoid colliding with existing ones for i2c and uart, but others can be used. Signed-off-by: Tomasz Bursztyka <[email protected]>

tbursztyka force-pushed the st_spi_on_nucleos branch from 133650c to 04b8505 Compare February 20, 2018 15:00

ydamigos approved these changes Feb 20, 2018

View reviewed changes

galak approved these changes Feb 20, 2018

View reviewed changes

galak merged commit 82e832f into zephyrproject-rtos:master Feb 20, 2018

tbursztyka deleted the st_spi_on_nucleos branch March 23, 2018 12:21

Enabling SPI ports on some nucleos #6172

Enabling SPI ports on some nucleos #6172

Uh oh!

Conversation

tbursztyka commented Feb 13, 2018 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

erwango commented Feb 13, 2018

Uh oh!

codecov-io commented Feb 13, 2018 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

tbursztyka commented Feb 13, 2018

Uh oh!

ydamigos left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

tbursztyka commented Feb 14, 2018

Uh oh!

tbursztyka commented Feb 16, 2018

Uh oh!

dwagenk commented Feb 16, 2018

Uh oh!

ydamigos left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

tbursztyka commented Feb 16, 2018

Uh oh!

ydamigos commented Feb 16, 2018

Uh oh!

tbursztyka commented Feb 16, 2018

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

tbursztyka commented Feb 20, 2018

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

7 participants

tbursztyka commented Feb 13, 2018 •

edited

Loading

codecov-io commented Feb 13, 2018 •

edited

Loading