HI,
I noticed that if I do `scons doc` the generated documentation doesn't
include any specific device, How can I generate the docs for a device?
Greetings,
Antal
Hi!
I need to persistently store data in the device I'm developing, so I
thought I would save it to flash. How can I do this? I didn't find anything
in xpcc, so I would have to use some lower level functions I think, but
what I don't know is how to allocate space for the data in the flash so
it's on a separate page?
Antal
Hi,
Due to the recent clock changes
(https://github.com/roboterclubaachen/xpcc/commit/4b67b08ffddeb608df3d90c059…)
there are now conflicts between develop and
feature/stm32f103_support_experimental, so now I'm not even able to
easily merge the new changes.
Now that it's easier to manually configure the clocks, I think it
would make sense to add the device and linker files (and whatever else
is needed) for stm32f103 to develop, so it can be used without
experimental features (but for now only with manual clock config).
What are your thoughts?
Antal
Hi!
I'm trying to get CAN working, and I ran into this error:
'Can1' is not a member of 'xpcc::stm32::SystemClock<...>'
As a reminder, I'm using the feature/stm32f103_support_experimental
branch, which is using the experimentel system_clock branch, so that
may be the problem.
I went looking for a solution, but I just cant find the definition of
SystemClock anywhere, it's very frustrating. I found a million
SystemClock-named template parameters and other things, but not what
I'm looking for. Can someone help me with this?
Regards,
Antal
Hi,
during the last developer meeting we had some discussions about the next
steps for xpcc.
In my opinion one of the main problems in using xpcc for bigger projects
is its build system. Although I like SCons and and implemented its
beginning in xpcc, it has grown to much into a system builder. That is fine
as long as xpcc is your primary platform, but makes it really awkward in
cases where it is not. It also makes it difficult to full integrate it into
IDEs like Eclipse, because the indexer has some problems deciding which
file is used and which isn't.
Another problem off xpcc is its size in combination with the release
management. A fresh checkout is 77 MB at the moment, without the Git
history its still 43 MB. In general that is not that much, but becomes
annoying when you have a lot of small projects which you need to support in
with different versions. Without a useful version schema, each project
needs its own separate copy of the library. It is not possible/to much work
to keep all projects always up-to-date to the most recent version of xpcc.
Yet still new features are only added to newer versions, therefore it is
also not useful to freeze an older version for all projects.
To solve these issues a possible solution is extract the system builder
part of the SCons system (basically everything in /architecture) into a
separate tool and make the remaining parts more modular. One approach for
this would be the library builder [1]. With this, a project would no longer
be build against the complete library, but a subset of the library would be
bundled together, containing only the needed and applicable parts for the
project/architecture. E.g. a LPC11 application does not need all the
STM32F.. library code. This greatly reduces the complexity of the generated
source tree, which allows for an easy integration with IDEs and build
systems other than SCons.
The disadvantage mainly comes for the library developer, because the
generation of the library becomes a separate step. For most projects you do
this once at the beginning, after you selected your target architecture,
but for library development you generate the library all the time. It may
require a different workflow, by developing a new feature within a project,
and only after it is finished moving it into the library.
So how to start the work on this:
Niklas already reserved modm-io on GitHub (modm stands for "Modular
Object-Oriented Development for Microcontrollers") to resolve the naming
issues between xpcc (the protocol) and xpcc (the library). I would start to
migrating code from the xpcc repository over, separating it into
independent modules. This requires a lot of structural changes which makes
it difficult to automatically merge changes from xpcc to modm.
The device driver generation part of SCons would be extracted into a
separate tool which generates the content of the architecture folder. This
will be the biggest amount of work. This tool will then be used by the
library builder to combine the architecture stuff with the other parts of
the library.
So far the idea, any comments/other suggestions on that?
Cheers,
Fabian
[1] https://github.com/dergraaf/library-builder
Hi.
I'm curious: using the same techniques you're using in xpcc , do you think
it would be possible to build something mbed compatible , but with similar
optimal results(memory, speed, etc) as xpcc gets ?
Hi!
Thanks for the advice in the previous thread. I fired up gdb, and ran
the program several times. This is the stack trace I get most of the
time:
(gdb) where
#0 _hardFaultHandler (ctx=0x2000bea0)
at build\libxpcc\generated_platform\driver\core\cortex\hard_fault_handler.cpp:39
#1 <signal handler called>
#2 0x08101374 in ?? ()
#3 <signal handler called>
#4 xpcc::BufferedGraphicDisplay<(unsigned short)160, (unsigned
short)128>::drawImageRaw (
this=0x20000854 <hardware::lcd>, upperLeft=..., width=5, height=8, data=...)
at D:\Prog\xpcc_test\xpcc\src/xpcc/ui/display/buffered_graphic_display_impl.hpp:92
#5 0x080011b0 in xpcc::GraphicDisplay::write (this=0x20000854
<hardware::lcd>, c=<optimized out>)
at D:\Prog\xpcc_test\xpcc\src\xpcc\ui\display\graphic_display_text.cpp:115
#6 0x080011d8 in xpcc::GraphicDisplay::Writer::write (this=<optimized
out>, c=<optimized out>)
at D:\Prog\xpcc_test\xpcc\src\xpcc\ui\display\graphic_display_text.cpp:139
#7 0x08000d86 in xpcc::IOStream::writeInteger (this=0x20000858
<hardware::lcd+4>, value=48)
at D:\Prog\xpcc_test\xpcc\src\xpcc\io\iostream.cpp:55
#8 0x08000dc0 in xpcc::IOStream::writeInteger (this=0x20000858
<hardware::lcd+4>, value=<optimized out>)
at D:\Prog\xpcc_test\xpcc\src\xpcc\io\iostream.cpp:35
#9 0x08000c40 in operator<< (v=<synthetic pointer>, this=0x20000858
<hardware::lcd+4>)
at D:\Prog\xpcc_test\xpcc\src/xpcc/io/iostream.hpp:206
#10 main () at main.cpp:41
What I get from this is that something causes an interrupt while
drawImageRaw is running, and then tries to jump to 0x08101374, an
invalid address, which causes the hard fault.
The code in frame 4 is:
87 uint16_t row = upperLeft.getY() / 8;
88 uint16_t rowCount = (height + 7) / 8; //
always round up
89
90 if ((height & 0x07) == 0)
91 {
92 for (uint_fast16_t i = 0; i < width; i++)
93 {
94 for (uint_fast16_t k = 0; k <
rowCount; k++)
95 {
96 uint16_t x =
upperLeft.getX() + i;
Line 92 is the for loop header, and I don't see anything that can go wrong here.
Also, it's not the exact same invocation where it crashes, the
upperLeft parameter of drawImageRaw is different every time.
Can you suggest anything I should try next?
Hi!
I just found xpcc, and it seems very promising. In my project I use an
STM32F103RC, and if I try to build a really simple project for it, I
get this error: "Error: XPCC Error: Could not find xml device file.".
I looked in the tools/device_file_generator directory, but I don't
really know how to use it. So my question is, what do I have to do to
be able to use this mcu?
Antal Szabó
Hi everyone,
First of all, a praise to your work! I just decided that a AVR-based platform
is no sufficient for my project and upgraded to an stm32-discovery board. All I
needed to modify in my application was a few Pin and device settings (about 5
lines). Thats it, the same application runs on a completely diffferent
platform. Awesome!
To my question:
I'm working on an Ambilight clone (I already submitted a driver for my PWM
devices). The device is connected via UART to a PC. Boblight runs on the PC
and sends colors via a certian protocol over UART. I'm using a very basic
protocol in the moment but would like to implement sanother one (LTBL). I
would like to contribute the protocol Implementation, maybe it's of use for
someone. So my question is: What would be the xpcc way of implementing a
protocol on top of UART?
Currently I'm using a protothread that reads a data stream from uart and
parses it token by token. However, I'm think more of something similar to a
driver.
Cheers
Christian
