What is the preferable way to add new BSP (for stm32 family)

[Karel Gardas]

Not sure about recent progress but IIRC Duc Doan (cced) is also using 
STM provided HAL for his work on GPIO driver for F4 BSP. Please see [1] 
and [2].

If however you consider HAL to be too heavy weight solution, perhaps you 
may have a look into STM provided LL (low-layers drivers) API? This 
should be more light weight low level API but with less portability. 
Please see UM1786[3].

Important question here is also a question of licensing. Last few 
releases of at least H7 HAL were done under Apache 2.0 license. F4 seems 
to be the same case and I would bet F3 would be same too. I mention that 
as RTEMS developers still need to kind of discuss Apache 2.0 licensed 
code in the project. Opinion were still not settled before summer 
holidays break but I do not know if there is any movement on this front.

Thanks,
Karel

[1]: https://devel.rtems.org/wiki/GSoC/2022
[2]: https://medium.com/@dtbpkmte
[3]: 
https://www.st.com/content/ccc/resource/technical/document/user_manual/a6/79/73/ae/6e/1c/44/14/DM00122016.pdf/files/DM00122016.pdf/jcr:content/translations/en.DM00122016.pdf


On 9/10/22 18:20, Y. HB wrote:
> I have seen in rtems 6.0, there are two stm32 families: stm32f4 and stm32h7
> 
> The former one uses custom code to set up BSP, while the latter one uses 
> the ST provided HAL lib to set up BSP.
> 
> Now I need to add a BSP for stm32f3, which is very different (reg 
> layout) from stm32f4.
> 
> To add stm32f3 BSP as the stm32f4 approach is tedious and error prone, 
> but slim codebase,
> the stm32h7 way has full capabilities provided via ST HAL, but may be 
> too bloat if many stm32 families being added into source tree.
> 
> So what is your suggestions? Which is a preferable way ?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list
> users at rtems.org
> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/users