Add GD32C1xx support #53
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for the PR!
It looks like the GD32C1x3 series is very similar to the GD32E1xx series; in fact the GigaDevice product selection guide lists them as being part of the same series. Do you think it would make sense to support them within the existing gd32e1 crate rather than in a separate gd32c1 crate? I guess the disadvantage is discoverability.
| # Copyright 2021 The gd32-rs authors. | ||
| # | ||
| # SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT OR Apache-2.0 | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This file looks very similar to can_common.yaml. Rather than duplicating it all, please include can_common.yaml here and then keep just the different parts in this file. If there are parts of can_common.yaml which don't apply then you can split them out to a new file which is included for the other models.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This file looks very similar to
can_common.yaml. Rather than duplicating it all, please includecan_common.yamlhere and then keep just the different parts in this file. If there are parts ofcan_common.yamlwhich don't apply then you can split them out to a new file which is included for the other models.
The C1 series can peripheral has substantial differences, I plan on adding the CAN-FD specific registers in a future PR. For now, i just cloned can_common.yaml as a placeholder.
yeah, my worry was discoverability. if it makes more sense to throw it in the gd32e1 crate thats fine, but it wont be the most intuitive thing from a user perspective. |
This commit adds support for the GD32C103/GD32C113, and cleans up a few issues that svdrust brought up about various improper write constraints.