Hi Xiang,

thanks for your reply and for your work on armv8-m.

Bye,
Michael



Am Do., 10. Dez. 2020 um 15:40 Uhr schrieb Xiang Xiao <
xiaoxiang781...@gmail.com>:

> On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 10:48 PM Michael Jung <mij...@gmx.net> wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > I recently bought an STM32L52E-DK development kit and I am playing around
> > with ST's port of ARM's TrustedFirmware-M (see ST's UM2671).  I would
> like
> > to basically leave this untouched, but replace ST's 'non-secure'
> > demo-application with a NuttX image.  It would be nice if you could give
> me
> > some advice before I start coding:
> >
> > 1.) The STM32L5 is an armv8-m architecture chip, which since recently
> > (thanks!) seems to be supported by NuttX.
> >   1.1.) Is armv8-m support already mature? Or do you expect considerable
> > effort in getting this working?
> >
>
> We use armv8-m on two different chipset, the result is very good so far.
>
>
> >   1.2.) With TrustedFirmware-M (TFM) the complete 'secure' domain is
> owned
> > by TFM. NuttX will only manage the 'non-secure' domain. Is there anything
> > inherent in NuttX's armv8-m support that requires access to the 'secure
> > domain'?
> >
>
> No, the arch code only touches the core registers in the unsecure domain.
>
>
> > 2.) To my understanding there currently is no support for STM32L5 devices
> > in NuttX.
> >   2.1.) Is anybody out there already working on STM32L5?
> >   2.2.) Given that STM32L5 is armv8-m based all hardware macros have been
> > extended for 'secure domain' support. For example many registers are
> > present twice for access control from 'secure' and 'non-secure'
> contexts. I
> > think this would warrant (yet another) 'arch/arm/src/stm32l5' directory.
> Do
> > you agree?
> >
> > Thanks!
> > Michael
> >
>

Reply via email to