> Is this helpful? > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NUTTX/Including+Files+in+board.h
Maybe but I think it would obscure things. I explain: Per my idea, exporting available GPIOs is done from board.h like this: #ifdef CONFIG_GPIO_1 # if defined(CONFIG_GPIO_1_OUT) # define GPIO_1_TYPE GPIO_OUTPUT_PIN # elif defined(CONFIG_GPIO_1_IN) # define GPIO_1_TYPE GPIO_INPUT_PIN # else /* CONFIG_GPIO_1_IRQ */ # define GPIO_1_TYPE GPIO_INTERRUPT_PIN # endif # define GPIO_1_PIN 2 # define GPIO_1_PORT 5 # define GPIO_1_ADDR STM32_GPIOE_BASE #endif /* CONFIG_GPIO_1 */ That means I should be able to access arch/arm/src/stm32/hardware/stm32f40xxx_memorymap.h from board.h, which is no dangerous at all, except that it's not easy Why not follow that page advice and do it from the C file? Because next C file is a system-wide file in drivers/ that fills system-wide GPIO struct with board information. Otherwise, I'd have to make a board function that fills system-wide struct and replicate that for every board thus recreating the problem I want to fix. If STM32 header files were in include/, there would be no problem, so I'm almost convinced that will be the best solution > > On 2/5/2021 7:34 PM, Brennan Ashton wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 5, 2021, 4:40 PM Grr <gebbe...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >>> You cannot include arch specific headers in board.h like that! That > will > >>> break a lot of things. > >>> > >> board.h is arch specific > > > >> It absolutely is not including arch headers will break things. > > board.h: > > > https://www.github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/tree/master/boards%2Farm%2Fstm32%2Fstm32f4discovery%2Finclude%2Fboard.h > > > > And the arch specific board configuration: > > > https://www.github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/tree/master/boards%2Farm%2Fstm32%2Fstm32f4discovery%2Fsrc%2Fstm32f4discovery.h > > > > > > > >> > >>> The expectation is that you pass the interfaces that you need into the > >>> drivers. If you have a particular "module" which contains multiple > >> devices > >>> that you want to support across different boards then just create a > thin > >>> driver that wraps everything else inside of it. Bypassing things like > the > >>> existing SPI CS or interrupt infrastructure is asking for trouble. > >>> > >> Combining my example (I forgot to mention ESP32) with that technique > means > >> creating at least 10 thin > >> > > You should not need to do that. Here is an example of how GPIO is > normally > > attached. Note this be done in per arch common code but it is arch > specific. > > > > > https://www.github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/tree/master/boards%2Farm%2Fstm32%2Fstm32f4discovery%2Fsrc%2Fstm32_gs2200m.c > > > > You could also create a shim for the driver to talk to the generic GPIO > > interface as we suggested earlier, but I'm not convinced that we would > gain > > much with that. > > > > > >>> For example I have a breakout module with a touchscreen, keyboard, and > SD > >>> card. This requires the I2C bus, SPI bus, and GPIO for card detection > and > >>> chip select. I just define a common name for the IO on the device and > >> then > >>> map that in board.h and then add the callbacks for the GPIO interrupt > and > >>> the chip select. This in total is about 50 lines of actual board code > >> and > >>> that is if you are not already using things like the SPI chip select. > >>> > >> My idea goes like this: > >> > >> 1-Board exports available GPIOs (among other things) > >> 2-Menuconfig offer GPIOs to user for selection. Selected ones become > >> available to drivers > >> 3-User configures needed drivers with selected GPIOs, also in Menuconfig > >> 4-Compiles > >> 5-If developing, user can test with incorporated char driver that > allows to > >> turn on and off selected GPIOs from a system testing utility > > > > To do this you would use the ioexpander/GPIO interface that was > mentioned. > > It can provide that functionality but you would still have to write lower > > half shims for the drivers that would consume GPIO this way. > > > > > >>> --Brennan > >>> > >>> On Fri, Feb 5, 2021, 3:08 PM Grr <gebbe...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>>> Yes, we need an additional struct for port number: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >> > https://github.com/FishsemiCode/nuttx/blob/song-u1/include/nuttx/lcd/ili9486_lcd.h#L49-L57 > >>>>> struct lcd_ili9486_config_s > >>>>> { > >>>>> uint8_t power_gpio; > >>>>> uint8_t rst_gpio; > >>>>> uint8_t spi_cs_num; > >>>>> uint8_t spi_rs_gpio; > >>>>> uint32_t spi_freq; > >>>>> uint8_t spi_nbits; > >>>>> }; > >>>>> But, we can reuse ioexpander_dev_s or gpio_dev_s, what's benefit to > >>> add a > >>>>> new gpioops_s? > >>>>> > >>>> I mean GPIO port, not SPÎ port. I mentioned SPI because GPIOs are > >> needed > >>> as > >>>> chip selects, resets and interrupt inputs for SPI devices > >>>> > >>>> But that's only my particular case. Point is to have GPIOs that can be > >>> used > >>>> anywhere for anything in a standard way > >>>> > >>>> We can add the public interface to arch/archx/include/chipy/chip.h, > >> like > >>>>> this: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >> > https://github.com/FishsemiCode/nuttx/blob/song-u1/arch/arm/include/song/chip.h#L75-L84 > >>>> > >>>> My question is how to reach arch/arm/src/stm32/stm32.h from > >>>> include/arch/board/board.h and sort the hardwired assumption of the > >> rest > >>> of > >>>> headers being local. It seems to me that only reasonable solution is > >>> moving > >>>> all header files to include/arch/ but I may be wrong >
