I apologize if this has been answered before, but I searched and did not see anything. Has ChibiOS been used on the STM32MP chips? These are a hybrid chip with a Cortex-M4 and 1 or 2 Cortex-A7's. The M4 core seems fairly standard and similar to an STM32F4 device. Peripherals are mostly dedicated to one of the cores or the other AFAICT (ie they are fairly well partitioned). I am considering these chips for a new application and wondering if anyone has dug into this.
Thank you!
James
Support for STM32MP* MCU/MPUs?
Moderator: RoccoMarco
-
Giovanni
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14891
- Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 8:48 am
- Has thanked: 1202 times
- Been thanked: 996 times
Re: Support for STM32MP* MCU/MPUs?
Hi,
I have not yet started with that one, I agree that it should be pretty simple after figuring out how you prepare an image to be loaded and setup things for debugging.
I find harder get started with that platform than simply writing the code.
Giovanni
I have not yet started with that one, I agree that it should be pretty simple after figuring out how you prepare an image to be loaded and setup things for debugging.
I find harder get started with that platform than simply writing the code.
Giovanni
Re: Support for STM32MP* MCU/MPUs?
I read a little more and found their "migration guide":
https://www.st.com/resource/en/applicat ... ronics.pdf
They suggest that the M4 core in these chips is very similar to the STM32F467/469 devices. The primary difference is that the STM32MP M4 core does not have internal FLASH, and consequently must execute code from SRAM. The peripherals are otherwise very similar. Depending on the application that could be a fairly major change.
These devices seem convenient although board area wise they aren't any better than a two chip solution. They are very cheap though if cost is a factor.
https://www.st.com/resource/en/applicat ... ronics.pdf
They suggest that the M4 core in these chips is very similar to the STM32F467/469 devices. The primary difference is that the STM32MP M4 core does not have internal FLASH, and consequently must execute code from SRAM. The peripherals are otherwise very similar. Depending on the application that could be a fairly major change.
These devices seem convenient although board area wise they aren't any better than a two chip solution. They are very cheap though if cost is a factor.