-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 212
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
Added option to print a selected subset of information from processor… #80
Conversation
…_check to UART0 during simulation.
Looks great! 👍 However, I would like to keep the memory requirements below 16kB - there is some stuff in the test program that is not needed anymore. I think it would be ok to make this a simulation-only test program so we can get rid of some is-simulation checks making the executable a little less smaller. I would do the changes if that is ok for you. |
@stnolting That's ok with me. |
sw/example/processor_check/main.c
Outdated
// make sure sim mode is disabled | ||
UART0_CT &= ~(1 << UART_CT_SIM_MODE); | ||
// reset UART0 and enable it | ||
UART0_CT = (1 << UART_CT_EN); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This will output "null" at some undefined Baud rate (=0) rather than using the original 19200 configuration. Is this really required? Or would it be ok to use the default baudrate here so the simulated receiver actually receives "0x00"?
* using macros to redirect prints * minor edits to allow execution on real (but constrained) hardware * minor edits to avoid execution of tests that might cause dead locks if certain HW modules are not implemented
I made some small edits here. The most importants are:
|
2x 0x00 from UART0/1 hardware tests
Seems to work 😉 |
Looks good! |
…_check to UART0 during simulation.