Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

database.microchip: generate AVRDevices from xml files #140

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

yorickvP
Copy link

@yorickvP yorickvP commented May 5, 2019

generated using some js. It's not perfect (most value missing at SAM*). Happy to get feedback, also on what to do with that javascript.

The website makes a point to say Copyright (c) 2018 Microchip Technology Inc. under an apache license. Maybe that should be in this file somewhere?

@electroniceel
Copy link
Member

Does it make sense to include the ATSAMx ARM-based controllers and the AVR32 controllers into this table?

These differ significantly from the "regular" AVR and XMEGA architectures and also use completely different programming interfaces. They show up with "signature=(undefined, undefined, undefined)" in your table because they don't have a signature fitting into the signature layout of avrs and xmegas.

@electroniceel
Copy link
Member

@whitequark: wouldn't it make sense to also include a list of compatible programming algos for each part into this table? So that you don't have to remember which algo a part uses, but just specify the part no and the applet picks the right algo for you?

Some avrs support an avr native algo and also jtag. So I'd make it a list.

@whitequark
Copy link
Member

@yorickvP To be clear on the status of this PR: this is valuable work but it is only a start of a complete implementation, since programming algorithms need to be classified from the somewhat messy form avrdude lists them in. So it is not enough on its own.

wouldn't it make sense to also include a list of compatible programming algos for each part into this table?

Yes of course.

Base automatically changed from master to main February 27, 2021 09:59
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants