Closed AlyoshaVasilieva closed 3 years ago
Names seem good enough; it's a shame ST don't have any nomenclature for the A/B parts but I couldn't find anything. The only other option I can think of is adding a bunch of duplicate features
stm32h72x
,stm32h73x
,stm32h74x
, andstm32h75x
, and then using#[cfg(any(feature="stm32h72x", feature="stm32h73x", ...)]
. Probably also addstm32h7ax
at that point. It's a bit more of a pain for us but might be a bit less confusing, what do you think?
I'm not a huge fan of multiple features leading to the same implementation, since it might make a user believe there is an underlying difference here. Not a strong opinion though, I'll switch to that definition method if you'd prefer it. (edit: Though a dupe feature for the A/B parts makes sense, due to the lack of a properly common name)
Having another feature for stm32h7ax
and then using stm32h7
for the rest sounds good to me!
Thank you for the PR!
I'd better use Adam's naming suggestion with duplicate features. A single stm32h7
feature that covers some of the subfamilies is confusing and doesn't look like a good idea. Also we already have specific subfamily features for F7 (stm32f72x
and stm32f73x
).
Released in v0.3.2 :tada:
All chips except 7A3/7B3/7B0 use the same addresses.
stm32h7
covers: RM0468 (723/733, 725/735, 730), RM0433 (742, 743/753, 750), and RM0399 (745/755, 747/757).stm32h7bx
covers: RM0455 (7A3/7B3, 7B0).Open to suggestions on feature naming.
Tested on an STM32H750VBT6 and an STM32H743VIT6. Appears to work; the flash size is certainly reading correctly.
Additionally add
.idea
dir to gitignore since my IDE puts garbage files in there.